- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 78,020
- Reaction score
- 81,981
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
I wonder why he's not focusing on arresting gang members?
After they have been caught and deported, the second and subsequent illegal entry is a felony. We are seeing people who have been deported five or six times caught by ICE. Those would be illegal alien felons.
Which would not be the people I was talking about.After they have been caught and deported, the second and subsequent illegal entry is a felony. We are seeing people who have been deported five or six times caught by ICE. Those would be illegal alien felons.
So, yiu have no problem deporting anyone who has illegally crossed the border more than once?Which would not be the people I was talking about.
None at all.So, yiu have no problem deporting anyone who has illegally crossed the border more than once?
You obviously got your silly story from media, even if you don't agree with my characterization of it. You could have said that rather than to lie and claim you had some special knowledge I'm sure you don't have.Yes, you do have memory problems. What you actually asked for me to post were my "mad lib media." I informed you those were not my sources.
Nope, you sought to invalidate the argument against illegals dodging federal taxes with a false parallel. I saw that and called you on it.Of course they should pay their fair share of taxes. And so should the Trumps'. That was my point your empty head couldn't grasp.
I think a few million "misdemeanors," which also take in such felonies as the murder of Lakin Riley, are much more serious than 34 fake felonies based on attributing campaign motives to accounting strategies.Well the only crime many illegal aliens commit is their entry into the United States, a misdemeanor. While Trump is a convicted criminal of 34 felonies. Which do you think is worse, a misdemeanor, or a felony?
you still appear clueless. That's on you.You obviously got your silly story from media, even if you don't agree with my characterization of it. You could have said that rather than to lie and claim you had some special knowledge I'm sure you don't have.
I did not such thing. You imagined that's what I did, which means, you called out your own imagination.Nope, you sought to invalidate the argument against illegals dodging federal taxes with a false parallel. I saw that and called you on it.
Keep on steering your boat down that river of Denial.you still appear clueless. That's on you.
I know that's what you think you did. But all you accomplished was a garden-variety whataboutism-- which didn't even keep up the parallel, as I pointed out by undermining your citation re the Hilary debat.I did not such thing. You imagined that's what I did, which means, you called out your own imagination.
What I actually did was highlight the hypocrisy of those who complain about some undocumented immigrants not paying their fair share of taxes while they don't care that Trump has done the same. Even worse, there are some who seem to admire him for doing so.
You poor thing. You still don't get that I answered that by pointing out my sources were not "mad lib media." Oh well, sucks to be you.I know that's what you think you did. But all you accomplished was a garden-variety whataboutism-- which didn't even keep up the parallel, as I pointed out by undermining your citation re the Hilary debat.
Guess again; you didn't give sources and you can't get out of that fact with fake logic. Sucks for you to keep losing.You poor thing. You still don't get that I answered that by pointing out my sources were not "mad lib media." Oh well, sucks to be you.
Again... I didn't give what you asked for, which was "mad lib media" sources, because that description doesn't fit my sources. Ask like a normal person and I can respond.Guess again; you didn't give sources and you can't get out of that fact with fake logic. Sucks for you to keep losing.
Nope, I don't have to censor my speech to spare your feelings. You don't agree with my characterization; you can just say so before you respond.Again... I didn't give what you asked for, which was "mad lib media" sources, because that description doesn't fit my sources. Ask like a normal person and I can respond.
Are there any ideas for this "better way" other than "leave us alone to keep doing what we're already doing?"Deporting them fails and we need the workers.
Maybe there's a better way.
No one said you had to. Just like no one said anyone has to humor you.Nope, I don't have to censor my speech to spare your feelings. You don't agree with my characterization; you can just say so before you respond.
A news blurb: the violent protests may have stayed in a relatively small area but there's nothing small about what they're going to cost California taxpayers: a cool thirty million and change. Wonder how much more damage and human injury would have transpired without the Guard? Will California get with the program at long last? But maybe all the people with economic sense left the state long ago.
You said I had to use whatever neutral phrase you wanted me to use in order to get an answer, so that's all you. You don't know how this "debate" thing works, huh?No one said you had to. Just like no one said anyone has to humor you.
I never said you had to do anything. Wtf is wrong with you?You said I had to use whatever neutral phrase you wanted me to use in order to get an answer, so that's all you. You don't know how this "debate" thing works, huh?
Yawn. I was hoping you'd say something extraordinarily dumb and thus be amusing, but your posts are just average dumb and thus boring.I never said you had to do anything. Wtf is wrong with you?
The 4-star commander of the NG and now 800 active duty Marines still in LA has recommended to SecDef Hegseth that 200 specially trained in firefighting but federalized CA NG troops in LA be returned to the state to fight outdoor fires currently burning. The request is pending with Hegseth The Horrible.Have the NG troops and Marines left or are they staying?