Best of Trump

[Geoff Weeks]

The Constitution applies to everybody here, to do otherwise all a accuser would have to do is claim you are not a citizen, deny due process and wisk you out the country.  Without going to court you have no way to dispute their allegations.  Citizenship would then be meaningless.

 There are ways to deport correctly, yes it takes time, but it is the only way to uphold the rights we hold dear.

This is not the same as someone at the boarder trying to gain entry, there are far less protections for anyone, citizens included, entering from outside.  Even as a citizen, you don't have restrictions on searches, even very invasive ones that would not be permitted once you are in country.

We are hearing more and more accounts of citizens being told to "self-deport" in E mails, so it is obvious we can not trust them to "get it right" the only thing preventing them from deporting these citizens is the constitution and you want that suspended?

[kscarbel2]

 

[kscarbel2]

5 hours ago, Geoff Weeks said:

If you don't understand the Constitution, Then there is not much I can do to explain. May be if you were picked off the street and wisked away in the night to a foreign country, it would help explain it to you.

I have no idea what the man in question is or isn't, I do know that he had a court order preventing what happened, and has not been given the chance of a defense. 

We have seen citizens detained without charge, that they want to deport. We have a system that allows the accused to defend them selves from any charge, when you take that away, we are no better than the worse countries on this globe.

 If you have charges, bring them to a court.

Not only does ICE make mistakes, they are not and can not be the sole arbriture of their accusations.

To be clear, so-called "constitutional protections" do not apply to non-citizens within the United States illegally.

[Geoff Weeks]

To be clear they do! Anybody has the right to have their right to address their accuser in a court of law. The court has said so!

[kscarbel2]

30 minutes ago, Geoff Weeks said:

To be clear they do! Anybody has the right to have their right to address their accuser in a court of law. The court has said so!

My friend, it does not apply to non-citizens who are illegally in the United States.

In other words, people who should not be standing on US soil, and are only doing so because they criminally entered the country.

An Illegal alien inherently enjoys no rights within the US, as they should not be within US borders to begin with.

[Geoff Weeks]

Well the supreme court has ruled otherwise. To not do so, the accuser would only have to accuse you then deport you even if you were a citizen. I prefer to follow the Supreme Courts ruling than yours.

[Mark T]

It's true. If due process wasn't given to the illegals how could all the lawyers and social workers ever get paid ?  Personally, I find it odd someone can enter the country , break the law in doing so and due process takes years.  I overload a truck by one or two thousand pounds ??? due process comes right to my mailbox in about a week or two.  I dobt I'd have much problem at all showing proof of citizenship if someone was trying to deport me. Maybe that's just me , or maybe it's because I AM without a doubt a citizen. This nonsense of catering to illegals has to stop, along with the conflating citizen's rights with The Bill of Rights. These big buzz word things don't do much for citizens or anyone else besides who proffits from all this insanity. Let's see someone sneak into China or India..... or any other country for that matter and see how it goes for them. 

[Joey Mack]

Well, where i live there a lot of Democrats practicing law, and sitting on the benches... I live around these type of illegals, and crime is rising...  I and others like me want them gone... I am not able to sell my house and move so I have to do my best here.  One may have a different opinion if they lived amongst these criminals.. I did not know that the constitution protects illegals... I hope it doesnt....  

[Geoff Weeks]

2 minutes ago, Mark T said:

It's true. I. Let's see someone sneak into China or India..... or any other country for that matter and see how it goes for them. 

We claim to be better than China, now we have to live up to that claim.

Citizens have already spent 10 days in"Custody" because they "didn't believe" his documents! It is why courts HAVE to be involved.

I carry a drivers Lic, whether they "choose" to believe that I am a citizen or not so far hasn't been tested with me, but has for others.

IF ICE gets to choose what is proof or if the document you have is valid, you better believe I want the ability to have a court review their actions.

[mowerman]

lol my wife grew up on the mexican border ,,,,,shes constantly preaching that,,,,enough said?????? lol bob

[mowerman]

oooooooo joey that was for you

[Joey Mack]

Its sad for me Bob...  I dont want to be this way, but these criminals are forcing me to hate them..  they brake the law to get here, then they want the law to protect them...   NOPE !! Maybe the ones who support these criminals should open their homes and let them stay there during the legal process..  It should only take a year or more...  

[Mark T]

1 minute ago, Geoff Weeks said:

We claim to be better than China, now we have to live up to that claim.

Citizens have already spent 10 days in"Custody" because they "didn't believe" his documents! It is why courts HAVE to be involved.

I carry a drivers Lic, whether they "choose" to believe that I am a citizen or not so far hasn't been tested with me, but has for others.

IF ICE gets to choose what is proof or if the document you have is valid, you better believe I want the ability to have a court review their actions.

Geoff....no offence (please)   some of these bad actors that are here amungst us now are so beyond false credentials and in bed with those who should be enforcing our laws it's sickening.  There's huge money being made off so much of these things and in the digital age so much can be covered up at the speed of light.  It's crazy what goes on and the number of people willing to "sell out" our country for their own gain or to save their own neck ???  Anyone really believe van halen or whatever his name is really cares about the MD dad ?  and don't even try tell'n me if you were broke down alongside the road you wouldn't be uncomfortable if ol MD dad was the only guy to stop if you were alone.    MY rights to life , liberty and pursuit of happiness have been trampled on for decades by the same ilk who preach all this nonsense about rights of law breakers. 

[mowerman]

i think they tryed that and cape cod,,,,,they didnt stay long,,,,,one thing about this overpriced over crowded ice haven,,,,we dont have a problem here,,,bob

[Geoff Weeks]

If you want to enforce the law you must first abide by it.

Here is a quote, you can look up the decision yourself about these deportations

"On April 7, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that if the Trump administration seeks to deport someone under President Donald Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA), then that deportee must first be afforded due process, including "notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal." Furthermore, according to the Court's order, "the notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs."

[Mark T]

2 minutes ago, Geoff Weeks said:

If you want to enforce the law you must first abide by it.

Here is a quote, you can look up the decision yourself about these deportations

"On April 7, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that if the Trump administration seeks to deport someone under President Donald Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA), then that deportee must first be afforded due process, including "notice and an opportunity to challenge their removal." Furthermore, according to the Court's order, "the notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs."

Yes yes.....and what was it 40 some years later The Supreme Court decided to overturn R v W ?    The Supreme Court has become too political and often interprets what they want of The Constitution as opposed to enforcing The Constitution.

Point is... they're not absolute as far as being correct on everything.  

[Geoff Weeks]

6 minutes ago, Mark T said:

 

Point is... they're not absolute as far as being correct on everything.  

Yes, and slavery was also deemed legal at some point in our country's past.

What matters is how the court rules, that is the law until the court says otherwise. 

You can criticize the Court, you can disagree with how they rule, but when you ignore the court then we cease being a country of laws and become the worse of all we fear.

 I would agree that they are "incorrect" in some of their rulings, but I still abide by them until I can successfully change the law or the ruling.

It isn't up to one man or one administration to choose what laws they will abide by and which they will ignore, we loose our freedom if that is allowed to happen.

[Mark T]

3 minutes ago, Geoff Weeks said:

Yes, and slavery was also deemed legal at some point in our country's past.

What matters is how the court rules, that is the law until the court says otherwise. 

You can criticize the Court, you can disagree with how they rule, but when you ignore the court then we cease being a country of laws and become the worse of all we fear.

 I would agree that they are "incorrect" in some of their rulings, but I still abide by them until I can successfully change the law or the ruling.

It isn't up to one man or one administration to choose what laws they will abide by and which they will ignore, we loose our freedom if that is allowed to happen.

Supreme Court doesn't make law.   When The Court ignores the law, that's supposed to be it ?  Truth is you or I can't change law. We're supposed to vote and our represenatives are supposed to take over from there to make law. The Legislative Branch is supposed to do that. Somehow ??? doesn't end up working like that.  Myself ???  I'd rather have the Maryland dad on another continent than be paying for someone's student loan they didn't pay a nickle on in years.  The whole system is so far removed from what it was intended it's not going to straighten out in any of our lifetimes.  

[Geoff Weeks]

The court is the is the final word on what the law is, that is one of the founding principles of our republic, if you want to overturn that, you are talking about loosing our entire foundation of our nation. 

[Mark T]

I'm not talking about overturning the law. I'm talking about enforcing the law as it is law to be enforced. Not the law to be enforced because of political belief. There's been a lot of picking and choosing as of the past several years based on emotion and not what law reads.  THAT is scarier than actually overturning the law. There's over ten million examples of broken laws in the country over the last four years. One or two questionable deportations is all of a sudden a reason to start redefining the writen law ?  I have more belief in what I see in front of a Home Depot than in the thoughts of a ranking official who can't explain what a woman is.

[Geoff Weeks]

Again, the SC ruling IS the law, and it was unanimous, and they trying to avoid compliance.

[70mackMB]

[Joseph Cummings]

1 hour ago, Mark T said:

I'm not talking about overturning the law. I'm talking about enforcing the law as it is law to be enforced. Not the law to be enforced because of political belief. There's been a lot of picking and choosing as of the past several years based on emotion and not what law reads.  THAT is scarier than actually overturning the law. There's over ten million examples of broken laws in the country over the last four years. One or two questionable deportations is all of a sudden a reason to start redefining the writen law ?  I have more belief in what I see in front of a Home Depot than in the thoughts of a ranking official who can't explain what a woman is.

[Mark T]

I know.... right ?

[Joseph Cummings]

1 minute ago, Mark T said:

I know.... right ?

LMAO