Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Vote Democrat, vote open borders

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vote Democrat, vote open borders

    Nancy has a moment of truth & tells us she wants an America with no borders.

    From below writing;

    "Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pelosi: Voting for Dems equals 'leverage' for illegals

    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asserted Wednesday that casting a vote for the Democratic Party in this fall’s midterm elections will give illegal immigrants “leverage” in the current immigration debate against Republican President Donald Trump’s tough-on-immigration policies.

    Joining immigration-rights activist Veronica Escobar – the Democratic nominee for Texas’ 16th Congressional District – in a visit to El Paso, Texas, Pelosi weighed the impact of the Trump administration’s policies to limit illegal border crossings before touting the party’s more illegal-friendly agenda.

    Taking a break from her assessment of the situation, the pro-immigration Democrat made a bold statement at the local West Texas press conference, assuring ultra-left immigration reform advocates that they and incoming illegal aliens would have a much easier time crossing the United States-Mexico border and staying in America if Democrats took over the majorities in U.S. Congress in November’s nationwide general elections.

    "We believe that we will have leverage when we win in November," Pelosi expressed, according to the Washington Free Beacon. "And why is that important? Because it gives leverage to every family – to every mom who courageously brought her child across the desert to escape, to escape death, rape, gang violence and the rest."

    During the press conference, Pelosi pounded home the importance of her party winning over Congress to give more illegal immigrants the chance to enter the U.S., most of whom would subsequently enjoy numerous government benefits courtesy of the American taxpayer.

    “While discussing her opposition to the president's zero tolerance policy on illegal immigration – which has since been rescinded – Pelosi was asked how long migrants, both lawful and unlawful, would have to wait for Congress to act on comprehensive reform,” the Beacon’s Haris Alic reported. “The congresswoman asserted she didn't ‘want to be political’ in her response, before alleging reform would be impossible – as long as the Republican Party remained in control of Congress.”

    Pelosi attempted to make the immigration reform debate between Democrats and Republicans into a moral issue while answering journalists’ questions.

    “Because this is the right thing to do, I have confidence that we will get where we need to go," Pelosi declared. "But everything is about time, and we want to shorten the distance – as your question indicated – between what we think is inevitable for America, [and what] they think is inconceivable."

    She also characterized the Democratic Party as a type of savior for illegal immigrants.


    “[Democrats’ immigration reform] gives hope because of the leverage it gives to families who may have followed – dad may have gone home for a family funeral and now can’t come into the country,” Pelosi claimed in El Paso, according to Fox News Insider. “All of those injustices have to be corrected.”

    She went on to insist that more and more Americans are siding with Democrats’ ultra-left immigration reform agenda, asserting that more lenient policies against illegals in the near future is “inevitable for America.”

    "And so we’re getting ready for this, and it is only to come back to a place that honors our values – recognizes the importance of immigration to the success of America," Pelosi added.

    She emphasized Democrats’ commitment to support illegal immigration and bring more migrants into America to increase diversity and perpetuate the nation’s long history of bringing in waves of immigrants.

    "We believe that we can get this done," Pelosi impressed, according to the Beacon. "We are not going to be able to get it done under the Republican leadership in Congress."

    Its all about immigration …

    With a Gallup Poll revealing last month that immigration is the biggest issue Americans are facing heading into the midterms, Pelosi’s invigorated stance on immigration reform Wednesday affirmed that Democrats are devoted to continue their national campaign that showcases immigration as the top goal in the party’s platform through November.

    Currently, getting rid of ICE is one of the biggest priorities for Democrats.

    “In July, only 18 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of a resolution expressing support for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), – the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws,” Alic informed. “The resolution was brought forward to a vote in response to legislation introduced by House Democrats to abolish ICE after a vocal portion of the party's leaders endorsed the agency's dissolution.”

    Conservative media not buying it

    Pelosi’s “humanitarian” plea in El Paso to welcome all families illegally approaching the border into the U.S. was called out by the conservative news media.

    “No, you don’t get to come off as Mother Theresa here …,” Townhall’s Matt Vespa insisted. “This party is rapidly becoming an anti-border enforcement; anti-police – an open border party that thinks we should allow anyone in the country because they have a sob story. [Just because] we all have problems doesn’t mean I can use that as a passport to get into any country or be given citizenship. Sorry, it’s against the law to come here illegally. If you’re caught, you get arrested, detained and deported. See you later.”

    The California Democrat’s recent advocacy of notorious MS-13 gang members and her call for the removal of ICE in order to stop the arrest, detainment and deportation of illegals has also come under attack.

    “And Pelosi is going to be a guiding voice on this when she defended the pack of animals that is MS-13,” Vespa pointed out. ”Democrats have continuously erected legislative obstacles to block the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities are another side issue in this debate.”

    He also addressed Pelosi’s staunch support of problematic sanctuary cities harboring illegals from ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agents.

    “Recently, Philadelphia became a sanctuary city, and guess what? … some illegal alien raped a child,” Vespa continued. “Mayor Jim Kenney was dancing for glee when a judge granted the City of Brotherly Love sanctuary status. Is he jumping for glee now? The city recently announced that they were terminating a contract that allowed ICE agents access their databases.”

    The five-year-old was raped as a result of loose borders during the Obama administration.

    “A Honduran national who was deported in 2009, then reentered the country and raped a child after being released by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, was convicted of illegally coming back to the United States on Tuesday, federal officials said,” Patch.com reported. “Juan Ramon Vasquez – a citizen of Honduras – pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation in May 2009, U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain said. In March 2014, Vasquez was found back in the United States by U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, federal authorities said. At that time, Vasquez was in the custody of the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, according to officials.”

    Taking the advice of pro-immigration Democrats like Pelosi and upcoming socialist Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Philadelphia’s leadership is determined not to comply with orders from federal immigration enforcement agents.

    “The City of Philadelphia thereafter chose not to comply with a detainer lodged by ICE for Vasquez, who was instead released from custody by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, federal authorities said,” the report continued. “After being released, Vasquez was rearrested and convicted for rape of a child and unlawful sexual contact with a minor, according to officials. He is serving a sentence of 8 to 20 years in state prison, federal authorities said.”

    McSwain blasted the City of Brotherly Love’s designation as a sanctuary city as being dangerous, saying the city’s leaders gave Vasquez a “free pass” to sexually assault the helpless five-year-old girl.

    “Sanctuary city” [status] fosters mistrust between the community and local law enforcement [by favoring undocumented immigrants],” the Department of Justice attorney argued during an interview with the Inquirer and Daily News, according to Philly.com. “If it turns out by playing favorites that you’re allowing children to get raped, my office is going to have a big problem with that.”

    Vespa contended that the rights and needs of criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants are of more importance to the Democratic Party than those of law-abiding U.S. citizens.

    “Democrats care more about illegal aliens than American citizens,” the Townhall reporter insisted. “They don’t care that these bad illegals are raping children. They want these people’s votes – despite the cases of child rape and murder that are inflicted upon the citizen population by illegals, which wouldn’t have happened if we enforced the laws and got the people who shouldn’t be here … out of our country.”

    He then addressed Pelosi’s problematic immigration agenda that she has placed under the façade of a moral obligation, “civil rights,” anti-discrimination, and compassionate humanitarian aid.

    “Nancy, your party’s policies will continue to allow these horrible stories to be in the news, but hey – it’s all about leverage, right,”
    Vespa concluded. “To a certain extent, it does highlight politics at its purest, though in some instances, the debate can be horrid: you can either do the right thing or win – you cannot have both. Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

    Just months ago, Pelosi came to the defense of the mayor of Oakland, California, when the city’s leader tipped off criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants in the Bay Area of impending ICE raids.


    https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...e-for-illegals

  • #2
    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
    Nancy has a moment of truth & tells us she wants an America with no borders.

    From below writing;

    "Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pelosi: Voting for Dems equals 'leverage' for illegals

    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asserted Wednesday that casting a vote for the Democratic Party in this fall’s midterm elections will give illegal immigrants “leverage” in the current immigration debate against Republican President Donald Trump’s tough-on-immigration policies.

    Joining immigration-rights activist Veronica Escobar – the Democratic nominee for Texas’ 16th Congressional District – in a visit to El Paso, Texas, Pelosi weighed the impact of the Trump administration’s policies to limit illegal border crossings before touting the party’s more illegal-friendly agenda.

    Taking a break from her assessment of the situation, the pro-immigration Democrat made a bold statement at the local West Texas press conference, assuring ultra-left immigration reform advocates that they and incoming illegal aliens would have a much easier time crossing the United States-Mexico border and staying in America if Democrats took over the majorities in U.S. Congress in November’s nationwide general elections.

    "We believe that we will have leverage when we win in November," Pelosi expressed, according to the Washington Free Beacon. "And why is that important? Because it gives leverage to every family – to every mom who courageously brought her child across the desert to escape, to escape death, rape, gang violence and the rest."

    During the press conference, Pelosi pounded home the importance of her party winning over Congress to give more illegal immigrants the chance to enter the U.S., most of whom would subsequently enjoy numerous government benefits courtesy of the American taxpayer.

    “While discussing her opposition to the president's zero tolerance policy on illegal immigration – which has since been rescinded – Pelosi was asked how long migrants, both lawful and unlawful, would have to wait for Congress to act on comprehensive reform,” the Beacon’s Haris Alic reported. “The congresswoman asserted she didn't ‘want to be political’ in her response, before alleging reform would be impossible – as long as the Republican Party remained in control of Congress.”

    Pelosi attempted to make the immigration reform debate between Democrats and Republicans into a moral issue while answering journalists’ questions.

    “Because this is the right thing to do, I have confidence that we will get where we need to go," Pelosi declared. "But everything is about time, and we want to shorten the distance – as your question indicated – between what we think is inevitable for America, [and what] they think is inconceivable."

    She also characterized the Democratic Party as a type of savior for illegal immigrants.


    “[Democrats’ immigration reform] gives hope because of the leverage it gives to families who may have followed – dad may have gone home for a family funeral and now can’t come into the country,” Pelosi claimed in El Paso, according to Fox News Insider. “All of those injustices have to be corrected.”

    She went on to insist that more and more Americans are siding with Democrats’ ultra-left immigration reform agenda, asserting that more lenient policies against illegals in the near future is “inevitable for America.”

    "And so we’re getting ready for this, and it is only to come back to a place that honors our values – recognizes the importance of immigration to the success of America," Pelosi added.

    She emphasized Democrats’ commitment to support illegal immigration and bring more migrants into America to increase diversity and perpetuate the nation’s long history of bringing in waves of immigrants.

    "We believe that we can get this done," Pelosi impressed, according to the Beacon. "We are not going to be able to get it done under the Republican leadership in Congress."

    Its all about immigration …

    With a Gallup Poll revealing last month that immigration is the biggest issue Americans are facing heading into the midterms, Pelosi’s invigorated stance on immigration reform Wednesday affirmed that Democrats are devoted to continue their national campaign that showcases immigration as the top goal in the party’s platform through November.

    Currently, getting rid of ICE is one of the biggest priorities for Democrats.

    “In July, only 18 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of a resolution expressing support for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), – the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws,” Alic informed. “The resolution was brought forward to a vote in response to legislation introduced by House Democrats to abolish ICE after a vocal portion of the party's leaders endorsed the agency's dissolution.”

    Conservative media not buying it

    Pelosi’s “humanitarian” plea in El Paso to welcome all families illegally approaching the border into the U.S. was called out by the conservative news media.

    “No, you don’t get to come off as Mother Theresa here …,” Townhall’s Matt Vespa insisted. “This party is rapidly becoming an anti-border enforcement; anti-police – an open border party that thinks we should allow anyone in the country because they have a sob story. [Just because] we all have problems doesn’t mean I can use that as a passport to get into any country or be given citizenship. Sorry, it’s against the law to come here illegally. If you’re caught, you get arrested, detained and deported. See you later.”

    The California Democrat’s recent advocacy of notorious MS-13 gang members and her call for the removal of ICE in order to stop the arrest, detainment and deportation of illegals has also come under attack.

    “And Pelosi is going to be a guiding voice on this when she defended the pack of animals that is MS-13,” Vespa pointed out. ”Democrats have continuously erected legislative obstacles to block the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities are another side issue in this debate.”

    He also addressed Pelosi’s staunch support of problematic sanctuary cities harboring illegals from ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agents.

    “Recently, Philadelphia became a sanctuary city, and guess what? … some illegal alien raped a child,” Vespa continued. “Mayor Jim Kenney was dancing for glee when a judge granted the City of Brotherly Love sanctuary status. Is he jumping for glee now? The city recently announced that they were terminating a contract that allowed ICE agents access their databases.”

    The five-year-old was raped as a result of loose borders during the Obama administration.

    “A Honduran national who was deported in 2009, then reentered the country and raped a child after being released by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, was convicted of illegally coming back to the United States on Tuesday, federal officials said,” Patch.com reported. “Juan Ramon Vasquez – a citizen of Honduras – pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation in May 2009, U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain said. In March 2014, Vasquez was found back in the United States by U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, federal authorities said. At that time, Vasquez was in the custody of the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, according to officials.”

    Taking the advice of pro-immigration Democrats like Pelosi and upcoming socialist Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Philadelphia’s leadership is determined not to comply with orders from federal immigration enforcement agents.

    “The City of Philadelphia thereafter chose not to comply with a detainer lodged by ICE for Vasquez, who was instead released from custody by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, federal authorities said,” the report continued. “After being released, Vasquez was rearrested and convicted for rape of a child and unlawful sexual contact with a minor, according to officials. He is serving a sentence of 8 to 20 years in state prison, federal authorities said.”

    McSwain blasted the City of Brotherly Love’s designation as a sanctuary city as being dangerous, saying the city’s leaders gave Vasquez a “free pass” to sexually assault the helpless five-year-old girl.

    “Sanctuary city” [status] fosters mistrust between the community and local law enforcement [by favoring undocumented immigrants],” the Department of Justice attorney argued during an interview with the Inquirer and Daily News, according to Philly.com. “If it turns out by playing favorites that you’re allowing children to get raped, my office is going to have a big problem with that.”

    Vespa contended that the rights and needs of criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants are of more importance to the Democratic Party than those of law-abiding U.S. citizens.

    “Democrats care more about illegal aliens than American citizens,” the Townhall reporter insisted. “They don’t care that these bad illegals are raping children. They want these people’s votes – despite the cases of child rape and murder that are inflicted upon the citizen population by illegals, which wouldn’t have happened if we enforced the laws and got the people who shouldn’t be here … out of our country.”

    He then addressed Pelosi’s problematic immigration agenda that she has placed under the façade of a moral obligation, “civil rights,” anti-discrimination, and compassionate humanitarian aid.

    “Nancy, your party’s policies will continue to allow these horrible stories to be in the news, but hey – it’s all about leverage, right,”
    Vespa concluded. “To a certain extent, it does highlight politics at its purest, though in some instances, the debate can be horrid: you can either do the right thing or win – you cannot have both. Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

    Just months ago, Pelosi came to the defense of the mayor of Oakland, California, when the city’s leader tipped off criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants in the Bay Area of impending ICE raids.


    https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...e-for-illegals
    I heard the other day that Trump's first wife was an illegal alien who sneaked in from Canada to work as a ski instructor which means three of Trumps kids are anchor babies. Further more I see Melania's parents just became citizens. Damn democrats are fine with this kind of chain migration.https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8486171.html

    îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


    • #3
      Originally posted by redrover View Post
      I heard the other day that Trump's first wife was an illegal alien who sneaked in from Canada to work as a ski instructor which means three of Trumps kids are anchor babies.
      I known. You are famous for what you heard the other day.

      Originally posted by redrover View Post
      Further more I see Melania's parents just became citizens. Damn democrats are fine with this kind of chain migration.https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8486171.html
      There are nice remedial courses in reading/comprehension I might recommend for you.

      It would hopefully help you to answer & address the actual topic of a writing, rather than so often veering off into odd fantasies and rabbit trails going no-where.

      Let's try again shall we : )

      ================================================== ==============

      Pelosi: Voting for Dems equals 'leverage' for illegals

      House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asserted Wednesday that casting a vote for the Democratic Party in this fall’s midterm elections will give illegal immigrants “leverage” in the current immigration debate against Republican President Donald Trump’s tough-on-immigration policies.

      Joining immigration-rights activist Veronica Escobar – the Democratic nominee for Texas’ 16th Congressional District – in a visit to El Paso, Texas, Pelosi weighed the impact of the Trump administration’s policies to limit illegal border crossings before touting the party’s more illegal-friendly agenda.

      Taking a break from her assessment of the situation, the pro-immigration Democrat made a bold statement at the local West Texas press conference, assuring ultra-left immigration reform advocates that they and incoming illegal aliens would have a much easier time crossing the United States-Mexico border and staying in America if Democrats took over the majorities in U.S. Congress in November’s nationwide general elections.

      "We believe that we will have leverage when we win in November," Pelosi expressed, according to the Washington Free Beacon. "And why is that important? Because it gives leverage to every family – to every mom who courageously brought her child across the desert to escape, to escape death, rape, gang violence and the rest."

      During the press conference, Pelosi pounded home the importance of her party winning over Congress to give more illegal immigrants the chance to enter the U.S., most of whom would subsequently enjoy numerous government benefits courtesy of the American taxpayer.

      “While discussing her opposition to the president's zero tolerance policy on illegal immigration – which has since been rescinded – Pelosi was asked how long migrants, both lawful and unlawful, would have to wait for Congress to act on comprehensive reform,” the Beacon’s Haris Alic reported. “The congresswoman asserted she didn't ‘want to be political’ in her response, before alleging reform would be impossible – as long as the Republican Party remained in control of Congress.”

      Pelosi attempted to make the immigration reform debate between Democrats and Republicans into a moral issue while answering journalists’ questions.

      “Because this is the right thing to do, I have confidence that we will get where we need to go," Pelosi declared. "But everything is about time, and we want to shorten the distance – as your question indicated – between what we think is inevitable for America, [and what] they think is inconceivable."

      She also characterized the Democratic Party as a type of savior for illegal immigrants.


      “[Democrats’ immigration reform] gives hope because of the leverage it gives to families who may have followed – dad may have gone home for a family funeral and now can’t come into the country,” Pelosi claimed in El Paso, according to Fox News Insider. “All of those injustices have to be corrected.”

      She went on to insist that more and more Americans are siding with Democrats’ ultra-left immigration reform agenda, asserting that more lenient policies against illegals in the near future is “inevitable for America.”

      "And so we’re getting ready for this, and it is only to come back to a place that honors our values – recognizes the importance of immigration to the success of America," Pelosi added.

      She emphasized Democrats’ commitment to support illegal immigration and bring more migrants into America to increase diversity and perpetuate the nation’s long history of bringing in waves of immigrants.

      "We believe that we can get this done," Pelosi impressed, according to the Beacon. "We are not going to be able to get it done under the Republican leadership in Congress."

      Its all about immigration …

      With a Gallup Poll revealing last month that immigration is the biggest issue Americans are facing heading into the midterms, Pelosi’s invigorated stance on immigration reform Wednesday affirmed that Democrats are devoted to continue their national campaign that showcases immigration as the top goal in the party’s platform through November.

      Currently, getting rid of ICE is one of the biggest priorities for Democrats.

      “In July, only 18 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of a resolution expressing support for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), – the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws,” Alic informed. “The resolution was brought forward to a vote in response to legislation introduced by House Democrats to abolish ICE after a vocal portion of the party's leaders endorsed the agency's dissolution.”

      Conservative media not buying it

      Pelosi’s “humanitarian” plea in El Paso to welcome all families illegally approaching the border into the U.S. was called out by the conservative news media.

      “No, you don’t get to come off as Mother Theresa here …,” Townhall’s Matt Vespa insisted. “This party is rapidly becoming an anti-border enforcement; anti-police – an open border party that thinks we should allow anyone in the country because they have a sob story. [Just because] we all have problems doesn’t mean I can use that as a passport to get into any country or be given citizenship. Sorry, it’s against the law to come here illegally. If you’re caught, you get arrested, detained and deported. See you later.”

      The California Democrat’s recent advocacy of notorious MS-13 gang members and her call for the removal of ICE in order to stop the arrest, detainment and deportation of illegals has also come under attack.

      “And Pelosi is going to be a guiding voice on this when she defended the pack of animals that is MS-13,” Vespa pointed out. ”Democrats have continuously erected legislative obstacles to block the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities are another side issue in this debate.”

      He also addressed Pelosi’s staunch support of problematic sanctuary cities harboring illegals from ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agents.

      “Recently, Philadelphia became a sanctuary city, and guess what? … some illegal alien raped a child,” Vespa continued. “Mayor Jim Kenney was dancing for glee when a judge granted the City of Brotherly Love sanctuary status. Is he jumping for glee now? The city recently announced that they were terminating a contract that allowed ICE agents access their databases.”

      The five-year-old was raped as a result of loose borders during the Obama administration.

      “A Honduran national who was deported in 2009, then reentered the country and raped a child after being released by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, was convicted of illegally coming back to the United States on Tuesday, federal officials said,” Patch.com reported. “Juan Ramon Vasquez – a citizen of Honduras – pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation in May 2009, U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain said. In March 2014, Vasquez was found back in the United States by U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, federal authorities said. At that time, Vasquez was in the custody of the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, according to officials.”

      Taking the advice of pro-immigration Democrats like Pelosi and upcoming socialist Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Philadelphia’s leadership is determined not to comply with orders from federal immigration enforcement agents.

      “The City of Philadelphia thereafter chose not to comply with a detainer lodged by ICE for Vasquez, who was instead released from custody by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, federal authorities said,” the report continued. “After being released, Vasquez was rearrested and convicted for rape of a child and unlawful sexual contact with a minor, according to officials. He is serving a sentence of 8 to 20 years in state prison, federal authorities said.”

      McSwain blasted the City of Brotherly Love’s designation as a sanctuary city as being dangerous, saying the city’s leaders gave Vasquez a “free pass” to sexually assault the helpless five-year-old girl.

      “Sanctuary city” [status] fosters mistrust between the community and local law enforcement [by favoring undocumented immigrants],” the Department of Justice attorney argued during an interview with the Inquirer and Daily News, according to Philly.com. “If it turns out by playing favorites that you’re allowing children to get raped, my office is going to have a big problem with that.”

      Vespa contended that the rights and needs of criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants are of more importance to the Democratic Party than those of law-abiding U.S. citizens.

      “Democrats care more about illegal aliens than American citizens,” the Townhall reporter insisted. “They don’t care that these bad illegals are raping children. They want these people’s votes – despite the cases of child rape and murder that are inflicted upon the citizen population by illegals, which wouldn’t have happened if we enforced the laws and got the people who shouldn’t be here … out of our country.”

      He then addressed Pelosi’s problematic immigration agenda that she has placed under the façade of a moral obligation, “civil rights,” anti-discrimination, and compassionate humanitarian aid.

      “Nancy, your party’s policies will continue to allow these horrible stories to be in the news, but hey – it’s all about leverage, right,”
      Vespa concluded. “To a certain extent, it does highlight politics at its purest, though in some instances, the debate can be horrid: you can either do the right thing or win – you cannot have both. Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

      Just months ago, Pelosi came to the defense of the mayor of Oakland, California, when the city’s leader tipped off criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants in the Bay Area of impending ICE raids.


      https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...e-for-illegals

      îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


      • #4
        Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

        I known. You are famous for what you heard the other day.



        There are nice remedial courses in reading/comprehension I might recommend for you.

        It would hopefully help you to answer & address the actual topic of a writing, rather than so often veering off into odd fantasies and rabbit trails going no-where.

        Let's try again shall we : )

        ================================================== ==============

        Pelosi: Voting for Dems equals 'leverage' for illegals

        House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asserted Wednesday that casting a vote for the Democratic Party in this fall’s midterm elections will give illegal immigrants “leverage” in the current immigration debate against Republican President Donald Trump’s tough-on-immigration policies.

        Joining immigration-rights activist Veronica Escobar – the Democratic nominee for Texas’ 16th Congressional District – in a visit to El Paso, Texas, Pelosi weighed the impact of the Trump administration’s policies to limit illegal border crossings before touting the party’s more illegal-friendly agenda.

        Taking a break from her assessment of the situation, the pro-immigration Democrat made a bold statement at the local West Texas press conference, assuring ultra-left immigration reform advocates that they and incoming illegal aliens would have a much easier time crossing the United States-Mexico border and staying in America if Democrats took over the majorities in U.S. Congress in November’s nationwide general elections.

        "We believe that we will have leverage when we win in November," Pelosi expressed, according to the Washington Free Beacon. "And why is that important? Because it gives leverage to every family – to every mom who courageously brought her child across the desert to escape, to escape death, rape, gang violence and the rest."

        During the press conference, Pelosi pounded home the importance of her party winning over Congress to give more illegal immigrants the chance to enter the U.S., most of whom would subsequently enjoy numerous government benefits courtesy of the American taxpayer.

        “While discussing her opposition to the president's zero tolerance policy on illegal immigration – which has since been rescinded – Pelosi was asked how long migrants, both lawful and unlawful, would have to wait for Congress to act on comprehensive reform,” the Beacon’s Haris Alic reported. “The congresswoman asserted she didn't ‘want to be political’ in her response, before alleging reform would be impossible – as long as the Republican Party remained in control of Congress.”

        Pelosi attempted to make the immigration reform debate between Democrats and Republicans into a moral issue while answering journalists’ questions.

        “Because this is the right thing to do, I have confidence that we will get where we need to go," Pelosi declared. "But everything is about time, and we want to shorten the distance – as your question indicated – between what we think is inevitable for America, [and what] they think is inconceivable."

        She also characterized the Democratic Party as a type of savior for illegal immigrants.


        “[Democrats’ immigration reform] gives hope because of the leverage it gives to families who may have followed – dad may have gone home for a family funeral and now can’t come into the country,” Pelosi claimed in El Paso, according to Fox News Insider. “All of those injustices have to be corrected.”

        She went on to insist that more and more Americans are siding with Democrats’ ultra-left immigration reform agenda, asserting that more lenient policies against illegals in the near future is “inevitable for America.”

        "And so we’re getting ready for this, and it is only to come back to a place that honors our values – recognizes the importance of immigration to the success of America," Pelosi added.

        She emphasized Democrats’ commitment to support illegal immigration and bring more migrants into America to increase diversity and perpetuate the nation’s long history of bringing in waves of immigrants.

        "We believe that we can get this done," Pelosi impressed, according to the Beacon. "We are not going to be able to get it done under the Republican leadership in Congress."

        Its all about immigration …

        With a Gallup Poll revealing last month that immigration is the biggest issue Americans are facing heading into the midterms, Pelosi’s invigorated stance on immigration reform Wednesday affirmed that Democrats are devoted to continue their national campaign that showcases immigration as the top goal in the party’s platform through November.

        Currently, getting rid of ICE is one of the biggest priorities for Democrats.

        “In July, only 18 Democrats in the House of Representatives voted in favor of a resolution expressing support for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), – the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws,” Alic informed. “The resolution was brought forward to a vote in response to legislation introduced by House Democrats to abolish ICE after a vocal portion of the party's leaders endorsed the agency's dissolution.”

        Conservative media not buying it

        Pelosi’s “humanitarian” plea in El Paso to welcome all families illegally approaching the border into the U.S. was called out by the conservative news media.

        “No, you don’t get to come off as Mother Theresa here …,” Townhall’s Matt Vespa insisted. “This party is rapidly becoming an anti-border enforcement; anti-police – an open border party that thinks we should allow anyone in the country because they have a sob story. [Just because] we all have problems doesn’t mean I can use that as a passport to get into any country or be given citizenship. Sorry, it’s against the law to come here illegally. If you’re caught, you get arrested, detained and deported. See you later.”

        The California Democrat’s recent advocacy of notorious MS-13 gang members and her call for the removal of ICE in order to stop the arrest, detainment and deportation of illegals has also come under attack.

        “And Pelosi is going to be a guiding voice on this when she defended the pack of animals that is MS-13,” Vespa pointed out. ”Democrats have continuously erected legislative obstacles to block the enforcement of federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities are another side issue in this debate.”

        He also addressed Pelosi’s staunch support of problematic sanctuary cities harboring illegals from ICE and other federal immigration enforcement agents.

        “Recently, Philadelphia became a sanctuary city, and guess what? … some illegal alien raped a child,” Vespa continued. “Mayor Jim Kenney was dancing for glee when a judge granted the City of Brotherly Love sanctuary status. Is he jumping for glee now? The city recently announced that they were terminating a contract that allowed ICE agents access their databases.”

        The five-year-old was raped as a result of loose borders during the Obama administration.

        “A Honduran national who was deported in 2009, then reentered the country and raped a child after being released by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, was convicted of illegally coming back to the United States on Tuesday, federal officials said,” Patch.com reported. “Juan Ramon Vasquez – a citizen of Honduras – pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation in May 2009, U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain said. In March 2014, Vasquez was found back in the United States by U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, federal authorities said. At that time, Vasquez was in the custody of the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, according to officials.”

        Taking the advice of pro-immigration Democrats like Pelosi and upcoming socialist Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Philadelphia’s leadership is determined not to comply with orders from federal immigration enforcement agents.

        “The City of Philadelphia thereafter chose not to comply with a detainer lodged by ICE for Vasquez, who was instead released from custody by the Philadelphia Department of Prisons, federal authorities said,” the report continued. “After being released, Vasquez was rearrested and convicted for rape of a child and unlawful sexual contact with a minor, according to officials. He is serving a sentence of 8 to 20 years in state prison, federal authorities said.”

        McSwain blasted the City of Brotherly Love’s designation as a sanctuary city as being dangerous, saying the city’s leaders gave Vasquez a “free pass” to sexually assault the helpless five-year-old girl.

        “Sanctuary city” [status] fosters mistrust between the community and local law enforcement [by favoring undocumented immigrants],” the Department of Justice attorney argued during an interview with the Inquirer and Daily News, according to Philly.com. “If it turns out by playing favorites that you’re allowing children to get raped, my office is going to have a big problem with that.”

        Vespa contended that the rights and needs of criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants are of more importance to the Democratic Party than those of law-abiding U.S. citizens.

        “Democrats care more about illegal aliens than American citizens,” the Townhall reporter insisted. “They don’t care that these bad illegals are raping children. They want these people’s votes – despite the cases of child rape and murder that are inflicted upon the citizen population by illegals, which wouldn’t have happened if we enforced the laws and got the people who shouldn’t be here … out of our country.”

        He then addressed Pelosi’s problematic immigration agenda that she has placed under the façade of a moral obligation, “civil rights,” anti-discrimination, and compassionate humanitarian aid.

        “Nancy, your party’s policies will continue to allow these horrible stories to be in the news, but hey – it’s all about leverage, right,”
        Vespa concluded. “To a certain extent, it does highlight politics at its purest, though in some instances, the debate can be horrid: you can either do the right thing or win – you cannot have both. Democrats want to win, and they seem to be willing to tolerate illegal alien criminality if that means boosting voter rolls through amnesty and pathways to citizenship.”

        Just months ago, Pelosi came to the defense of the mayor of Oakland, California, when the city’s leader tipped off criminal aliens and other illegal immigrants in the Bay Area of impending ICE raids.


        https://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...e-for-illegals
        I found the Independent article linked by RR to be relevant. You apparently disagree. Please compare and contrast Melania's immigration history (along with her family), with the current prez' proposals to end "chain migration", among other conditions for legal immigration. If you disagree that Melania has any history with less-than-legal immigration, you could state it as such. If you believe Melania actually did a few things that weren't quite legal regarding immigration, but those actions are not relevant to Pelosi's attempt to favor illegal immigration, you could make that claim. Proceed.

        îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


        • #5
          Originally posted by radcentr View Post
          I found the Independent article linked by RR to be relevant. You apparently disagree. Please compare and contrast Melania's immigration history (along with her family), with the current prez' proposals to end "chain migration", among other conditions for legal immigration. If you disagree that Melania has any history with less-than-legal immigration, you could state it as such. If you believe Melania actually did a few things that weren't quite legal regarding immigration, but those actions are not relevant to Pelosi's attempt to favor illegal immigration, you could make that claim. Proceed.
          What I said here is where I stand on illegal aliens coming into our country illegally.

          https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/for...446#post557446

          [ "Illegal aliens" - no, they're not immigrants - have no rights as Americans and SHOULD be immediately detained and returned to where ever they came from. ]

          That's what this topic is about.

          It isn't about "chain migration" and all of the other ridiculous things that have been added on to the foolish immigration policies we've adopted.

          These are related but peripheral. They can be dealt with when we FIRST return to sensible immigration policies and rid ourselves of "politicians" who hate America so much that they publicly argue for removing our borders !

          People like Nancy Pelosi only encourage other nuts to do more crazy things !

          Like the following . . .

          These are the kind of people arguing for open borders.

          They don't want prisons either !

          They don't understand the danger they'd be in without borders and prisons.

          They'll say and do crazy things, not knowing that the best results for them, will be if they're mostly ignored !

          They have this fantasy of a peaceful world full of love, ...

          ...as THEY ENCOURAGE AND ACT ON promoting a dangerous world of hate, violence and killing !!

          People this weak in mind and body would be the first to be eliminated in the jungle of anarchy they wish to create !

          They won't ever thank us, but we must not let them accomplish what they seek !


          -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          ‘Abolish Prisons’: ICE Protesters ‘Occupy’ Prison Connected to Agency by Chaining Themselves to Doors

          A resistance group opposed to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and private prisons locked themselves to doors and concrete barrels to “occupy” a private prison in Nashville.
          .....

          https://ijr.com/2018/08/1114529-ice-...ers-nashville/

          îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


          • #6
            I, too, am for enforcing our borders to control immigration. Any politician who states otherwise is either going for a cynical angle (fe divide and conquer for votes) or is genuinely naive.

            I am also for enforcing those laws for everyone, regardless of income and/or social status. If laws -including immigration laws- are "loosely" enforced depending on one's status, the law loses some or all of it's legitimacy.

            I understand and share your contempt for the cynical politician who tries to pander for votes. My question to you is this: What is your position on the hypocritical politician, who would apply the law unequally, for his personal convenience? It is a relevant question, because it deals with the very same issue -immigration law enforcement.

            îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


            • #7
              The crazies are getting crazier & more dangerous.

              Over allowing illegal aliens to invade America !!

              -----------------------------------------------------------------------

              Federal agents arrested a Massachusetts man in New York for allegedly using Twitter to solicit the murder of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

              The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts announced Thursday morning that federal agents arrested Brandon Ziobrowski, 33, of Cambridge, at 7:15 a.m. for tweeting a threat saying he “would give $500 to anyone who kills an ICE agent.”

              “I am broke, but I will scrounge and literally give $500 to anyone who kills an ice agent. @me seriously who else can pledge get it on this let’s make it work,” Ziobrowski allegedly tweeted July 2, according to NBC News.

              Twitter later suspended his account at the request of law enforcement officials.

              The suspect allegedly began posting threatening messages against politicians and law enforcement long before his alleged July tweet. He wrote in one tweet that he desired to “slit” Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) throat and began tweeting messages encouraging violence against members of law enforcement, according to the indictment.

              The indictment also stated that he threatened ICE over Twitter in March.

              Ziobrowski is accused of using interstate and foreign commerce to transmit a threat to injure another person, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. He is expected to appear in Brooklyn federal court on Thursday for his initial hearing.


              https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...er-ice-agents/

              îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


              • #8
                Fortunately, such crazy people are in short supply. We won't see mass (or even short list) murders of ICE officials, because of the small minority of crazies out there. That's a good thing.

                Unfortunately, there is a generous supply of corrupt politicians, as well as a judiciary system that tolerates a "status" qualification for those who break the law. If one has more money, that person is more likely to be judged innocent and/or pay a smaller penalty for the same infraction. The argument is, this form of corruption poses a much greater risk to the Republic, because there is a much larger supply of corrupt politicians and legal professionals who accept some form of amnesty based on wealth.

                îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  I, too, am for enforcing our borders to control immigration. Any politician who states otherwise is either going for a cynical angle (fe divide and conquer for votes) or is genuinely naive.

                  I am also for enforcing those laws for everyone, regardless of income and/or social status. If laws -including immigration laws- are "loosely" enforced depending on one's status, the law loses some or all of it's legitimacy.

                  I understand and share your contempt for the cynical politician who tries to pander for votes. My question to you is this: What is your position on the hypocritical politician, who would apply the law unequally, for his personal convenience? It is a relevant question, because it deals with the very same issue -immigration law enforcement.
                  Yes, it is a relevant question.

                  You ask; "What is your position on the hypocritical politician, who would apply the law unequally, for his personal convenience?"

                  You're speaking to so much more than this topic alone !!

                  These creative "lawmaking" types, our politicians, apply so many hundreds of Americas laws unequally, for their personal convenience !

                  They are in a different class than the American citizen. They are elite and follow different "law." Different standards.

                  Which is why . . .

                  As I stated earlier; These items can and must "... be dealt with when we FIRST return to sensible immigration policies and rid ourselves of "politicians" who hate America so much that they publicly argue for removing our borders !..."

                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  Fortunately, such crazy people are in short supply. We won't see mass (or even short list) murders of ICE officials, because of the small minority of crazies out there. That's a good thing.

                  Unfortunately, there is a generous supply of corrupt politicians, as well as a judiciary system that tolerates a "status" qualification for those who break the law. If one has more money, that person is more likely to be judged innocent and/or pay a smaller penalty for the same infraction. The argument is, this form of corruption poses a much greater risk to the Republic, because there is a much larger supply of corrupt politicians and legal professionals who accept some form of amnesty based on wealth.
                  Yes, as I was saying above.

                  and

                  IF we can somehow bring about American law applying equally to ALL, it will be miraculous.

                  Powerful, rich and corrupt people NEVER easily or quickly give up power.

                  They will lie to and manipulate us for as long as they can to hold on to what they have.

                  îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                    Yes, it is a relevant question.

                    You ask; "What is your position on the hypocritical politician, who would apply the law unequally, for his personal convenience?"

                    You're speaking to so much more than this topic alone !!

                    These creative "lawmaking" types, our politicians, apply so many hundreds of Americas laws unequally, for their personal convenience !

                    They are in a different class than the American citizen. They are elite and follow different "law."

                    Which is why . . .

                    As I stated earlier; These items can and must "... be dealt with when we FIRST return to sensible immigration policies and rid ourselves of "politicians" who hate America so much that they publicly argue for removing our borders !..."
                    Those "open borders" politicians come in two flavors: The ones that don't really believe it (cynical), and the ones who actually believe it (naive). Rest assured, they are in a comfortably small minority, even within the Democratic party. While the Libertarians have a significant number who believe the same nonsense, we could lump the whole lot of "open borders" politicians into one category -Politicians Who Will Never Gain Majority in Congress.

                    In short, you should pay attention, but sleep like a baby. Also know this: Your grandchildren will also sleep like babies on the same issue, even when they are older than you are. "Open Borders" will happen someday, when it truly doesn't matter anymore. When every country is reasonably stable -not suffering any significant chaos. I declare here and now, it will happen 200 years hence (Just kidding). Until that day comes, we can count on 90% or more of all concerned voters realizing that violent people should be avoided unless one is properly trained. We can even count on that same 90% taking measures to ensure that violent and other unqualified people are prevented from casually arriving in our country.

                    îä îëéìåú äçãùåú?

                    Working...
                    X