Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > There's fewer Mexican rapists inside our borders now

There's fewer Mexican rapists inside our borders now (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2017, 05:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Care to actually frame a question correctly in the first place rather than make everyone guess at your intent?
The question was framed just fine. I said "immigration" when you wanted to see "travel." The spirit of my question was obvious and you've successfully derailed the conversation and avoided having to answer the question, so bravo on that one.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2017, 05:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
So we have to have read your mind to know what you ACTUALLY meant?
I don't expect you to read my mind. Frankly, I'm surprised you're even capable of reading the screen in front of you.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 3, 2017, 07:14 PM
 
Exclusive: Trump administration considering separating women, children at Mexico border | Reuters
Women and children crossing together illegally into the United States could be separated by U.S. authorities under a proposal being considered by the Department of Homeland Security, according to three government officials.
The policy shift would allow the government to keep parents in custody while they contest deportation or wait for asylum hearings. Children would be put into protective custody with the Department of Health and Human Services, in the "least restrictive setting" until they can be taken into the care of a U.S. relative or state-sponsored guardian.
I thought republicans were pro-family? /s
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 4, 2017, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
The question was framed just fine. I said "immigration" when you wanted to see "travel." The spirit of my question was obvious and you've successfully derailed the conversation and avoided having to answer the question, so bravo on that one.
I'm so glad you guys have never berated me for not admitting when I **** up, that would make this awkward, right? So now that that's out of the way, could you help me by pointing out said immigration restrictions? I wasn't aware of a ban on visa submissions.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2017, 12:32 PM
 
Deflect! Deflect! Deflect!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 6, 2017, 12:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Because they aren't "unprecedented"?
Why comparing Trump's and Obama's immigration restrictions is flawed | PolitiFact

Trump said, "My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months."

The Obama administration in 2011 delayed processing Iraqi refugees for six months following evidence of a failed plot by two Iraqi refugees.

Trump’s executive order temporarily bars travel to the United States for all citizens from seven countries, and it is not in direct response to actions from citizens of those countries.

Furthermore, Iraqi refugees were nonetheless admitted to the United States during the 2011 suspension while Trump has put an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

We rate Trump’s claim Mostly False.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2017, 02:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Deflect! Deflect! Deflect!
I'm certain you wish you understood what that means.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2017, 02:27 PM
 
That's a bald-faced lie, it's a reaction to what citizens from those countries have done in other parts of the world and their continued support of terrorist organizations. Politifact has really been scraping the bottom lately, they desperately need a new editorial staff, it's a real shame what it's become.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2017, 02:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
it's a reaction to what citizens from those countries have done in other parts of the world.
...which is different from the reasoning of Obama's refugee visa halt.

...and you forgot to address the difference in implementation, which was completely different between the two. Like I said, unprecedented.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2017, 02:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I'm certain you wish you understood what that means.
Condescension! Condescension! Condescension!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2017, 05:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
...which is different from the reasoning of Obama's refugee visa halt.
So? It's still the same result, and that's what was under scrutiny in the first place. There is no immigration ban, no matter how you want to spin it.

...and you forgot to address the difference in implementation, which was completely different between the two. Like I said, unprecedented.
Go ahead and explain how Trump's travel ban is that different from Obama's travel ban?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2017, 06:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Condescension! Condescension! Condescension!
Awwww...
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 11:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Go ahead and explain how Trump's travel ban is that different from Obama's travel ban?
The link did the job, no reason for me to reiterate what they already wrote. Unprecedented.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 11:32 AM
 
That link and that data have been posted before, but to some, there is no discernment, because they do not want to see any.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 11:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
The link did the job, no reason for me to reiterate what they already wrote. Unprecedented.
Nope, try again.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 11:53 AM
 
Quoting again. I'm 'bout to go all OAW with the bold.

Trump said, "My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months."

The Obama administration in 2011 delayed processing Iraqi refugees for six months following evidence of a failed plot by two Iraqi refugees.

Trump’s executive order temporarily bars travel to the United States for all citizens from seven countries, and it is not in direct response to actions from citizens of those countries.

Furthermore, Iraqi refugees were nonetheless admitted to the United States during the 2011 suspension while Trump has put an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

We rate Trump’s claim Mostly False.
Unprecedented.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 12:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Quoting again. I'm 'bout to go all OAW with the bold.
Ha!

OAW
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 03:54 PM
 
I'm jackin' your style.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 04:07 PM
 
I fail to see the difference between Trump's and Obama's. Not that it matters in the least.

I don't support the ban, but the FUD, misinformation, and hysteria the reaction to it has created has been downright depressing - mostly because it looks like the most vocal and hysterical of those protesting it are also the least intelligent and least informed. I guess that's how the media makes their money though.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 05:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I fail to see the difference between Trump's and Obama's. Not that it matters in the least.

I don't support the ban, but the FUD, misinformation, and hysteria the reaction to it has created has been downright depressing - mostly because it looks like the most vocal and hysterical of those protesting it are also the least intelligent and least informed. I guess that's how the media makes their money though.
So from what you've read above, or anywhere else, you genuinely believe Obama indefinitely banned ALL TRAVEL from SEVEN COUNTRIES like Trump did? Really? Because that's what you have to believe to 'fail to see the difference.'

Well, that's not what Obama did. At all. So you're lacking either in intellectual honestly or basic reading comprehension. Sorry to be harsh, but really dude, there's no other choices here.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 05:13 PM
 
Obama:
Billy: Mom, Timmy hit me.
Mom: Ok, Timmy isn't allowed over here any more, and for that matter, neither are his brothers, until they straighten up.

Trump:
Billy: Olaf and Brad said they were going to hit me. Timmy helped me make them back off.
Mom: Ok, Bobby, Johnny, Kevin, Abdul, Jose, and Pierre can't come over. Neither can Timmy.

2 months later:
Mom: Ok, I've changed my mind, Timmy can come over. But not those other guys.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 10, 2017, 06:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
So from what you've read above, or anywhere else, you genuinely believe Obama indefinitely banned ALL TRAVEL from SEVEN COUNTRIES like Trump did? Really? Because that's what you have to believe to 'fail to see the difference.'
Put your strawman away brother, not needed here.

I fail to see a material difference between Obama banning travel from one country and Trump banning travel from 7. I'm sorry, I just don't see it. I don't think the ban was a good move, either way.

Well, that's not what Obama did. At all. So you're lacking either in intellectual honestly or basic reading comprehension. Sorry to be harsh, but really dude, there's no other choices here.
I'm sorry brother, but your lack of rationality here does not make me intellectually dishonest or unable to read. The fact you would even suggest such just demonstrates your inability to bring rationality into this discussion, and that you wouldn't accept a logical or well founded argument even if it was shoved up your ass - your head is in the way.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2017, 12:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Quoting again. I'm 'bout to go all OAW with the bold.

Unprecedented.
"Unprecedented" doesn't mean what you think it means, obviously, but feel free, it doesn't make him any more right when he does it, either.

On the extreme end, the Johnson-Reed Act banned travel, and immigration, from nearly every country in the far east, and that was for almost 30 years.

"... excluded from entry anyone born in a geographically defined “Asiatic Barred Zone” except for Japanese and Filipinos."

https://history.state.gov/milestones...mmigration-act
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2017, 12:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I'm sorry brother, but your lack of rationality here does not make me intellectually dishonest or unable to read. The fact you would even suggest such just demonstrates your inability to bring rationality into this discussion, and that you wouldn't accept a logical or well founded argument even if it was shoved up your ass - your head is in the way.
His MO is to wedge in those personal attacks, he seems to take it as a personal affront that anyone dares to disagree with him, making reasonable conversation impossible.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2017, 04:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
Put your strawman away brother, not needed here.

I fail to see a material difference between Obama banning travel from one country and Trump banning travel from 7. I'm sorry, I just don't see it. I don't think the ban was a good move, either way.

I'm sorry brother, but your lack of rationality here does not make me intellectually dishonest or unable to read. The fact you would even suggest such just demonstrates your inability to bring rationality into this discussion, and that you wouldn't accept a logical or well founded argument even if it was shoved up your ass - your head is in the way.
So is your argument that what Trump has done is the same as what Obama did, with the only, and non-material difference, being a matter of scale? That is not a logical or well founded argument. That's a statement of belief that does not square with the facts.

Again, Obama TEMPORARILY halted PROCESSING REFUGEES from ONE COUNTRY based on SPECIFIC INTELLIGENCE of a MATERIAL THREAT.

Trump INDEFINITELY banned ALL TRAVEL from SEVEN COUNTRIES with NO INTELLIGENCE JUSTIFICATION.

The issue is not if you think one or the other was a good idea, but if they are materially different. If you can't recognise the massive difference in both scale and motivation, I can't come up with anything beyond a wilful desire to ignore reality.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2017, 04:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
"Unprecedented" doesn't mean what you think it means, obviously, but feel free, it doesn't make him any more right when he does it, either.

On the extreme end, the Johnson-Reed Act banned travel, and immigration, from nearly every country in the far east, and that was for almost 30 years.

"... excluded from entry anyone born in a geographically defined “Asiatic Barred Zone” except for Japanese and Filipinos."

https://history.state.gov/milestones...mmigration-act
Good find. Another proud moment in history from the 'Party of Lincoln."
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 11, 2017, 01:19 PM
 
It was passed with a bi-partisan vote. Also at that time Dems were running around the countryside in white hoods burning crosses, so it was pretty bad all over.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2017, 04:30 PM
 
Indiana Restaurant Owner To Be Deported Friday | News - Indiana Public Media
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
"I never thought bears would eat my face," says someone who voted for the "Bears Eating Faces" party.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2017, 06:16 PM
 
Person A: States reasonable point of view.
Person B: States unreasonable point of view.
Person A: Your point of view is unreasonable. Either you know this or you don't. It logically follows that if you know, you're being an asshole and if you don't then you're an idiot.
Person B: If you're going to make personal attacks then we can't have a reasonable discussion.

Sometimes the possibility of reasonable discussion stops with the unreasonable point of view. Especially if its held by someone who knows its unreasonable.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2017, 10:53 PM
 
Who are you talking to/in reference to what?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2017, 04:48 PM
 
unfortunate thread title.

High school rape in Maryland shows need for tougher immigration policy - Washington Times

edited to add: My mistake, they aren't mexican illegal immigrants - gautemala and el salvador.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2017, 05:54 PM
 
I fail to see how the thread title is unfortunate.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2017, 07:09 PM
 
I have a simple question. If that same rape had been committed by US citizens ... something which happens on a daily basis unfortunately ... would one be similarly outraged? Because if one is more outraged because the perpetrator was an "illegal immigrant" then perhaps one needs to examine their underlying motivations.

OAW
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2017, 07:58 PM
 
I think the general idea is it wouldn't have happened if he wasn't here. I agree with the sentiment but you'd have to show it was preventable. Was he a 'bad hombre' prior to tjthis s? If so, I wish he'd been deported instead of the OP.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2017, 09:16 PM
 
I think Thomas, who's kind of a jerk IMO, is conflating two different questions.

Even though I'm radically pro-immigration, I can see the argument there should be penalties for evading the system. Were our system just, I myself would be far more inclined to play hardball with those who disrespected the law.

That's a different question for how a minor who disrespects immigration laws gets treated. A minor with a parent who's legally living here.

In a scenario like this, during the months it usually takes to process a deportation case, what's usually going to make the most sense is to release them into the custody of their parent, not lock them up.

Abandoning this guideline is not an argument I can see. Certainly not from a single data point.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back in the Good Ole US of A
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2017, 09:15 AM
 
I laughed so ****ing hard when I read that story. That woman is a complete and utter moron. She got exactly what she deserves.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2017, 01:18 PM
 
If I'm reading the memos properly, and there's not an important piece of the story missing, the Trump administration's policy guidelines are this guy should get to slide.

Whoever made the decision may have felt enabled by Trump's assholishness, but what they were told they should do is let the guy slide.

This is what the wife expected, and what was done. While there still may be schadenfreude, it's not as all encompassing as it reads on the surface.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2017, 05:12 PM
 
^^ Indeed. That's a case of assholes on the Left deciding to punish someone by misusing the system, similar to how IRS procedures were abused not long ago, then regressives sit back and laugh and mock those being persecuted under wrongful detainment and or prosecution. Real winners, there.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 26, 2017, 07:29 PM
 
I was imagining a right wing asshole, but a left wing one is within the realm of possibility.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 01:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If I'm reading the memos properly, and there's not an important piece of the story missing, the Trump administration's policy guidelines are this guy should get to slide.

Whoever made the decision may have felt enabled by Trump's assholishness, but what they were told they should do is let the guy slide.

This is what the wife expected, and what was done. While there still may be schadenfreude, it's not as all encompassing as it reads on the surface.
It's hearing what you want to hear. Trump was also open to a new Operation Wetback during the campaign. She must have forgotten about that.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 06:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
I have a simple question. If that same rape had been committed by US citizens ... something which happens on a daily basis unfortunately ... would one be similarly outraged? Because if one is more outraged because the perpetrator was an "illegal immigrant" then perhaps one needs to examine their underlying motivations.

OAW
If two adults (18 and 17 y/o) were enrolled as freshman, and then took turns raping a 14 year old girl in the bathroom, you're damned right I would be similarly outraged.

If this happens on a daily basis, can you please find me an example from 2017? Remember, this happened during school hours on a school property, where attendance is compulsory as a matter of law.

My problem isn't with them being immigrants, it's with them gang-raping a 14 year old girl who by rights (and by law) they never should have met, much less had an opportunity to rape in a bathroom.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 06:29 PM
 
^^^

When I said "daily basis" I meant rapes in general. Not the specific circumstances of it occurring to a 14 year old in a school bathroom as in this case. But looking back on it I can see how when I used the phrase "same rape" that one might not get that from my words. I should have been more precise. That being said, I have no objections to the sentiment you expressed above. Because I share it.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 06:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
It's hearing what you want to hear. Trump was also open to a new Operation Wetback during the campaign. She must have forgotten about that.
Is it irrelevant what she wanted to hear actually matches what he's done?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 10:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is it irrelevant what she wanted to hear actually matches what he's done?
This falls completely in line with what he's done.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 27, 2017, 11:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
This falls completely in line with what he's done.
If I read Trump's immigration crackdown memo correctly, it maintains the previous DHS guidelines for who ICE can let slide. This guy qualifies on multiple grounds.

Here's the crackdown memo...

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi...l-Interest.pdf

...which says right up front this memo...

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi...red_action.pdf

...still stands.

Unless I misread it (I admit I only skimmed), the husband is an ideal candidate to let slide.
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 28, 2017, 10:08 AM
 
Would you say ICEs actions thus far reflect your purported policy?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 28, 2017, 10:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Would you say ICEs actions thus far reflect your purported policy?
My purported policy? I'm not the DHS.

Are there other examples of this happening?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 28, 2017, 10:20 AM
 
The OP?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 28, 2017, 10:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
The OP?
She should be covered under these guidelines as well.

So, we have a grand total of two examples where people aren't following the administration guidelines, therefore this is what the administration wants as opposed to what they put in writing?
     
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 28, 2017, 10:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
She should be covered under these guidelines as well.

So, we have a grand total of two examples where people aren't following the administration guidelines, therefore this is what the administration wants as opposed to what they put in writing?
We're back in that situation where you seem to be giving generous benefit of the doubt. You don't strike me as the type of person who would take what a politician says (or writes) at face value, but here you are doing that for Trump again.

I might remind you that we only have these two cases because they got picked up by the news. It's not like we have ICE self reporting here. But we have seen news of more aggressive enforcement, like picking up undocumented at courthouses or removing a person with a brain tumor from a hospital.

Tell me, how many more examples do I need to dig up to change your mind?
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:56 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2