Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is that every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, we were functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote here."
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members amounted to "fascism".
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is that >> every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively >> unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, we were >> functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote >> here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to >> joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members >> amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them don't even
know what the word actually means.
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>> claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even
know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be >>considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is that >>every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively >>unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, we were >>functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote >>here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left >but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here. >Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself is >a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is >unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to >>joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members >>amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally >and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass >back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
Crosspost to newsgroups Ubi doesn't read cut.
Here's a citation to the story Ubi the shithead plagarized.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/regular-msnbc-guest-all-laws-passed-before-1965-should-be-presumptively-unconstitutional
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to >>>joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members >>>amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally >>and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass >>back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Did any of these men have a final order of removal? Trump doesn't say.
We know in one prominent case, the man had an order from an immigration
judge that he was NOT subject to removal (as long as he didn't violate >conditions of humanitarian parole).
Let's retain probable cause, shall we? Prosecute the fuckers for crimes >committed in the United States upon indictment with probable cause.
Trump doesn't present evidence in court 'cuz there ain't none.
You can't defend Trump on this.
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
Of course this is moviePig language, but Trump is merely removing
people. Where's the promised transparency?
It's a coverup.
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of themWorse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
don't even
know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to qualify as truly fascist?
On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 12:05:38 -0700, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>>>> claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book >>>>> is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could >>>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote >>>> here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >>>> here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>>> Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even
know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what >>> the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a >>> laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
That's a desperate definition of Fascism from wikipedia that tries to
make it seem otherwise to every Communist movement and state.
Here is fascism defined in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fascism
"a system of government characterized by rigid one-party
dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private
economic enterprise under centralized governmental control,
belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc."
in other words, every communist state and movement, though
the definition of communism in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/communism
"a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the
community as a whole or to the state"
Anti-fascists have often said that anti-communists are
only about opposition to this very abstract definition
of communism and never on any valid reasons.
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to
qualify as truly fascist?
The 1930's usage of the epithet Fascist also includes
anyone or anything uncooperative, so an engine that
dies is a fascist engine and a horse that limps is a
fascist horse, a gun that misfires is a fascist gun, re.
the Hemingway book For Whom The Bell Tolls.
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie
Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here
could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >>> here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>> Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even
know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them
what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a
little bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep
using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism
which the listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy."Â -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to qualify as truly fascist?
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>>> claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could >>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >>> here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>> Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
Crosspost to newsgroups Ubi doesn't read cut.
Here's a citation to the story Ubi the shithead plagarized.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/regular-msnbc-guest-all-laws-passed-before-1965-should-be-presumptively-unconstitutional
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>> claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be >>> considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively >>> unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, we were >>> functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote >>> here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left >> but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here. >> Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Does that include the post-Civil War civil rights legislation written by
the Radical Republicans, all of which was found CONSTITUTIONAL and in
force by the Supreme Court under Earl Warren? Even Hansberry v. Lee (Hansberry was the father of Lorraine Hansberry) was decided in 1940,
under Charles Hughes.
Does that include the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
. . .
Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. . . .
On 2025-04-07 3:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:If that's the definition you're going with, you need to explain exactly
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie
Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the
book is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here
could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they
live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>>> Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and
send his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even
know what the word actually means.
don't know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them
what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they
never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing
the word around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a
little bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep
using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism
which the listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy."Â -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to
qualify as truly fascist?
how Trump, the Republicans, and America in general are "fascist" cecause that's exactly what your Leftist brothers constantly insist.
Apr 7, 2025 at 12:19:29 PM PDT, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Here's a citation to the story Ubi the shithead plagarized.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/regular-msnbc-guest-all-laws-passed-before-1965-should-be-presumptively-unconstitutional
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal >>>>claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be >>>>considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>presumptively unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting >>>>Rights Act, we were functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody >>>>who lived here could vote here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left >>>but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote
even if they live here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution
is unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Does that include the post-Civil War civil rights legislation written by >>the Radical Republicans, all of which was found CONSTITUTIONAL and in
force by the Supreme Court under Earl Warren? Even Hansberry v. Lee >>(Hansberry was the father of Lorraine Hansberry) was decided in 1940,
under Charles Hughes.
Does that include the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
And since the 13th Amendment was passed in 1865, well before Mystal's cutoff, >I guess slavery's back on the menu, boys!
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't >>> know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book >>>>> is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, >>>>> we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could >>>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote >>>> here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >>>> here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former >>>>> Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days >>>>> prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang >>>>> members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send >>>> his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what >>> the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never >>> actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word >>> around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little >>> bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a >>> laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't even in the same universe as all that.
Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
. . .
Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. . . .
To be fair, that's how I use "commie".
On 2025-04-07 3:41 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 12:05:38 -0700, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>
wrote:
That's a desperate definition of Fascism from wikipedia that tries toIn other words, the language is just reverting to what it was in the
make it seem otherwise to every Communist movement and state.
Here is fascism defined in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fascism
"a system of government characterized by rigid one-party
dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private
economic enterprise under centralized governmental control,
belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc."
in other words, every communist state and movement, though
the definition of communism in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/communism
"a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the
community as a whole or to the state"
Anti-fascists have often said that anti-communists are
only about opposition to this very abstract definition
of communism and never on any valid reasons.
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to
qualify as truly fascist?
The 1930's usage of the epithet Fascist also includes
anyone or anything uncooperative, so an engine that
dies is a fascist engine and a horse that limps is a
fascist horse, a gun that misfires is a fascist gun, re.
the Hemingway book For Whom The Bell Tolls.
1930s where everything is fascist so the word means nothing.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 15:45:58 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
On 2025-04-07 3:41 PM, Pluted Pup wrote:
On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 12:05:38 -0700, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>> wrote:
That's a desperate definition of Fascism from wikipedia that tries toIn other words, the language is just reverting to what it was in the
make it seem otherwise to every Communist movement and state.
Here is fascism defined in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fascism
"a system of government characterized by rigid one-party
dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private
economic enterprise under centralized governmental control,
belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc."
in other words, every communist state and movement, though
the definition of communism in American English:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/communism
"a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the
community as a whole or to the state"
Anti-fascists have often said that anti-communists are
only about opposition to this very abstract definition
of communism and never on any valid reasons.
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to >>>> qualify as truly fascist?
The 1930's usage of the epithet Fascist also includes
anyone or anything uncooperative, so an engine that
dies is a fascist engine and a horse that limps is a
fascist horse, a gun that misfires is a fascist gun, re.
the Hemingway book For Whom The Bell Tolls.
1930s where everything is fascist so the word means nothing.
Which is no different from the term "Woke" which has devolved to
essentially mean "I don't like this."
Mon, 7 Apr 2025 15:45:58 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>: >>2025-04-07 3:41 PM, Pluted Pup:
. . .
The 1930's usage of the epithet Fascist also includes
anyone or anything uncooperative, so an engine that
dies is a fascist engine and a horse that limps is a
fascist horse, a gun that misfires is a fascist gun, re.
the Hemingway book For Whom The Bell Tolls.
In other words, the language is just reverting to what it was in the
1930s where everything is fascist so the word means nothing.
Which is no different from the term "Woke" which has devolved to
essentially mean "I don't like this."
On 4/7/2025 3:48 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 3:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:If that's the definition you're going with, you need to explain
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie
Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the
book is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights
Act, we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here
could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they
live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and
former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two
days prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and
gang members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and
send his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even
know what the word actually means.
don't know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them
what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they
never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing
the word around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would
figure out that they've made the word meaningless and start using
different words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at
least a little bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they
just keep using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a
result. They become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations
of fascism which the listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about
so that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist
political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial
leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of
opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of
individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race,
and strong regimentation of society and the economy."Â -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something
to qualify as truly fascist?
exactly how Trump, the Republicans, and America in general are
"fascist" cecause that's exactly what your Leftist brothers constantly
insist.
I'm not "going with it", it's just the first that Googled up. But I
think it serves as evidence of an inherently problematic label.
On 2025-04-07 4:15 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:48 PM, Rhino wrote:I ss that you completely ignored my challenge to show how Trump, the >Republicans or the USA is fascist. Instead, you chose to quibble about
On 2025-04-07 3:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:If that's the definition you're going with, you need to explain
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>> wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie >>>>>>> Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the
book is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights
Act, we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here
could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they >>>>>> live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>>> itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and
former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two
days prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and
gang members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country >>>>>> illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and
send his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them >>>>>> don't even
know what the word actually means.
don't know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them
what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they
never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing
the word around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would
figure out that they've made the word meaningless and start using
different words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at
least a little bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they
just keep using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a
result. They become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations
of fascism which the listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about
so that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist
political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial
leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of
opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of
individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race,
and strong regimentation of society and the economy."Â -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something
to qualify as truly fascist?
exactly how Trump, the Republicans, and America in general are
"fascist" cecause that's exactly what your Leftist brothers constantly
insist.
I'm not "going with it", it's just the first that Googled up. But I
think it serves as evidence of an inherently problematic label.
the definition that you yourself offered.
Mon, 7 Apr 2025 17:45:15 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>:
. . .
I ss that you completely ignored my challenge to show how Trump, the >>Republicans or the USA is fascist. Instead, you chose to quibble about
the definition that you yourself offered.
Fascist tendencies in Trump: A comparison to Hitler's rise | DW News >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgPzDctPM8
Is the US descending into fascism? Interview with Professor Jason
Stanley | DW News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geRic3w01ng
Is President Trump Fascist? | NYT Opinion >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QK1IVi4REI
I wouldn't call him a fascist but there are certainly some tendencies
that go along with fascism as pointed out in the above videos.
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>> wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't >>>> know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>> should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book >>>>>> is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, >>>>>> we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could >>>>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously >>>>> hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote >>>>> here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>> itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days >>>>>> prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang >>>>>> members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country >>>>> illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send >>>>> his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them >>>>> don't even know what the word actually means.
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never >>>> actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word >>>> around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure >>>> out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different >>>> words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little >>>> bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using >>>> "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're >>>> listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so >>>> that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
On 2025-04-07 4:15 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:48 PM, Rhino wrote:I see that you completely ignored my challenge to show how Trump, the Republicans or the USA is fascist. Instead, you chose to quibble about
On 2025-04-07 3:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:If that's the definition you're going with, you need to explain
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous"Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they
<weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie >>>>>>> Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the
book is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights
Act, we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here
could vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left
but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can
vote here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if
they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the
Constitution itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and
former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two
days prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and
gang members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the
country illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and
send his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of
them don't even
know what the word actually means.
don't know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym
for everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what the word "fascist" means to them and the response is
always an embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know.
But they never actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep
throwing the word around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would
figure out that they've made the word meaningless and start using
different words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at
least a little bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they
just keep using "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a
result. They become a laughingstock as they keep making accusations
of fascism which the listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about
so that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist
political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial
leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of
opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of
individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race,
and strong regimentation of society and the economy."Â -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something
to qualify as truly fascist?
exactly how Trump, the Republicans, and America in general are
"fascist" because that's exactly what your Leftist brothers
constantly insist.
I'm not "going with it", it's just the first that Googled up. But I
think it serves as evidence of an inherently problematic label.
the definition that you yourself offered.
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>> wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>> should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, >>>>>>> we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously >>>>>> hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here.
Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>>> itself is
a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is >>>>>> unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days >>>>>>> prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump >>>>>>> administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang >>>>>>> members
amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country >>>>>> illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send
his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them >>>>>> don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure >>>>> out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different >>>>> words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using >>>>> "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the >>>>> listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're >>>>> listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so >>>>> that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political >>>> ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, >>>> belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we legally need to deport them.
Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
. . .
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we >legally need to deport them.
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>>> should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously >>>>>>> hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even >>>>>>> if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while >>>>>>> here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using >>>>>> "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the >>>>>> listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're >>>>>> listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political >>>>> ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, >>>>> belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't >>>> even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other allegations.
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is that >> every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be presumptively >> unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, we were >> functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could vote >> here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left >but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here. >Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live >here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself is >a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is >unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior to >> joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members >> amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally >and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass >back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them don't even >know what the word actually means.
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>>>> should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while >>>>>>>> here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't >>>>> even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we >>> legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation >>>>>>>>>> Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks >>>>>>>> them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least >>>>>>>> a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They >>>>>>>> become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than >> it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other >>>> allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to the U.S. and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation >>>>>>>>>>>> Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>>>>>>> should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously >>>>>>>>>>> hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even >>>>>>>>>>> if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>>>>>>>> itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country >>>>>>>>>>> illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while >>>>>>>>>>> here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them >>>>>>>>>>> don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks >>>>>>>>>> them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different >>>>>>>>>> words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least >>>>>>>>>> a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using >>>>>>>>>> "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They >>>>>>>>>> become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the >>>>>>>>>> listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're >>>>>>>>>> listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>>>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>>>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't >>>>>>>> even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we >>>>>> legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to the U.S. >> and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't want
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation >>>>>>>>>>>>> Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously >>>>>>>>>>>> hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even >>>>>>>>>>>> if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while >>>>>>>>>>>> here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks >>>>>>>>>>> them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least >>>>>>>>>>> a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using >>>>>>>>>>> "fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They >>>>>>>>>>> become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the >>>>>>>>>>> listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're >>>>>>>>>>> listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>>>>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>>>>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't >>>>>>>>> even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other >>>>>> allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry... >>>
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to the U.S. >>> and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't >>>> want
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while >>>>>>>>>>>>> here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks >>>>>>>>>>>> them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least >>>>>>>>>>>> a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They >>>>>>>>>>>> become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual >>>>>>>>>>> interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >>>>>>>>>>> regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals? >>>>>>>>
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS >>>>>> necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other >>>>>>> allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua >>>>>> gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry... >>>>
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
Something unproven.
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for >>>>>>>>>>>>> everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks >>>>>>>>>>>>> them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an >>>>>>>>>>>>> embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least >>>>>>>>>>>>> a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They >>>>>>>>>>>>> become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals? >>>>>>>>>
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS >>>>>>> necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other >>>>>>>> allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua >>>>>>> gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out. >>>>
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They chose violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd pick this hill
to die on.
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:And
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence. >>>>
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, >>>>>>>>>>>>> centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals? >>>>>>>>>>
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS >>>>>>>> necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other >>>>>>>>> allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua >>>>>>>> gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to >>>>>>>> fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to >>>>>> the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out. >>>>>
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they >>>>> oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of punishment."
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd pick this >> hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:And
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals? >>>>>>>>>>>
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need. >>>>>>>>>
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to >>>>>>>>> fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner. >>>>>>>>
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to >>>>>>> the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence. >>>>>
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they >>>>>> oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly develop a taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has >>> discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd pick this >>> hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong and the guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head and the demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- against all odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a totally nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 of them look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those are the ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing either legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the violent thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single moms and all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now on the chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other countries' criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" means he can never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those pictures above here in America.
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need. >>>>>>>>>>
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner. >>>>>>>>>
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level, >>>>>>>> we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they >>>>>>> oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly develop >> a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has >>>> discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They >>>> chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- against >> all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a totally >> nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 of them >> look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those are the >> ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing either >> legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now on the >> chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil
motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" means he >> can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965 should be
considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book is
that every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting
Rights Act, we were functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who
lived here could vote here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously hard-left >but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote here. >Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even if they live here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution itself
is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the Constitution is >unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days prior
to joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang members >> amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally >and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass >back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them don't even >know what the word actually means.
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and dentistry...
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>
wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need. >>>>>>>>>>>
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner. >>>>>>>>>>
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and >>> unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on >>>> crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's >>> committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- against >>> all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those are the >>> ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to >>> pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil
motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" means he >>> can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those >>> pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above, yes, everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig"So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and >>>>>>>>>>> dentistry...
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote:And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political
wrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism".
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need. >>>>>>>>>>>>
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner. >>>>>>>>>>>
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals. >>>>>>
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a >>>>> non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of >>>>> punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly >>>> develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and >>>> unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other >>>> people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd >>>>>> pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on >>>>> crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong >>>> and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head >>>> and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's >>>> committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a >>>> totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing >>>> either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to >>>> pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the >>>> violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single >>>> moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil
motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other
countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those >>>> pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class >>> passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored >>> the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above,
yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly...
On Apr 9, 2025 at 9:15:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist politicalwrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined network host and formerYes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner. >>>>>>>>>>>>
dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, theyTHEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted. >>>>>>>>>
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals. >>>>>>>
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a >>>>>> non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration >>>>>> violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of >>>>>> punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly >>>>> develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other >>>>> people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd >>>>>>> pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong >>>>> and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head >>>>> and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a >>>>> totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation. >>>>>
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing >>>>> either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the >>>>> violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single >>>>> moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil >>>>> motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other >>>>> countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class >>>> passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored >>>> the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above, >>> yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly...
One wonders if you're really this stupid or just playing it for effect.
You really think the officers of the Titanic are going to stop and hold a trial for *anyone* while the ship is starting tilt bow downward?
On 4/9/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 9, 2025 at 9:15:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultranationalist politicalwrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fact that they don't
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joined >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> network host and formerYes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care
of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and
dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses >>>>>>>>>>>> the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, theyTHEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted. >>>>>>>>>>
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals. >>>>>>>>
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison.
Google:
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a >>>>>>> non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration >>>>>>> violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly >>>>>> develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd >>>>>>>> pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong
and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head
and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- >>>>>> against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a >>>>>> totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation. >>>>>>
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300 >>>>>> of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those >>>>>> are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing
either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the
violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single >>>>>> moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now >>>>>> on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil >>>>>> motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other >>>>>> countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" >>>>>> means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one: >>>>>
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have >>>>> affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above,
yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly...
One wonders if you're really this stupid or just playing it for effect.
You really think the officers of the Titanic are going to stop and hold a >> trial for *anyone* while the ship is starting tilt bow downward?
You can't legally discriminate based on crimes that are merely alleged.
On Apr 9, 2025 at 12:01:12 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/9/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 9, 2025 at 9:15:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:One wonders if you're really this stupid or just playing it for effect. >>>
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>Google:
wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net>
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultranationalist politicalwrote:Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody who lived here could
vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is unconstitutional but the Constitution
itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joinedYes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country
network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't
know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their
leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that.
How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care
of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and
dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses >>>>>>>>>>>>> the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, theyTHEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted. >>>>>>>>>>>
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals. >>>>>>>>>
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison. >>>>>>>>
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration >>>>>>>> violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly
develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd
pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong
and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head
and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is-- >>>>>>> against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a
totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation. >>>>>>>
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300
of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those >>>>>>> are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing
either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the
violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single
moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now
on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil >>>>>>> motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other >>>>>>> countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies" >>>>>>> means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one: >>>>>>
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have >>>>>> affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above,
yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly... >>>
You really think the officers of the Titanic are going to stop and hold a >>> trial for *anyone* while the ship is starting tilt bow downward?
You can't legally discriminate based on crimes that are merely alleged.
The captain of a sinking ship filling lifeboats absolutely can legally do that.
On 4/9/2025 3:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 9, 2025 at 12:01:12 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>
On 4/9/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 9, 2025 at 9:15:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:One wonders if you're really this stupid or just playing it for effect. >>>>
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above,
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>Google:
wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultranationalist politicalWorse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody who lived here could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone
who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joinedYes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snuck into the country
network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Steele just two days
prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't
know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and
keep throwing the word
around with abandon.
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their
leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what
he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care
of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and
dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses
the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime >>>>>>>>>>>>> and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, theyTHEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted. >>>>>>>>>>>>
But they're being PUNISHED for something else.
No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison. >>>>>>>>>
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly
develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The >>>>>>>>>> government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for >>>>>>>>>> deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd
pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong
and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head
and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and >>>>>>>> rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is--
against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a
totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300
of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those
are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing
either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to >>>>>>>> force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the
violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single
moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now
on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil
motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other
countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies"
means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys >>>>>>>> in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one: >>>>>>>
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have >>>>>>> affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character... >>>>>>
yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly... >>>>
You really think the officers of the Titanic are going to stop and hold a
trial for *anyone* while the ship is starting tilt bow downward?
You can't legally discriminate based on crimes that are merely alleged.
The captain of a sinking ship filling lifeboats absolutely can legally do >> that.
'You' in this instance refers to an otherwise unconstrained enforcer of
the Constitution ...not to the captain of a sinking ship.
On Apr 9, 2025 at 2:01:57 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/9/2025 3:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 9, 2025 at 12:01:12 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>
On 4/9/2025 1:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote:The captain of a sinking ship filling lifeboats absolutely can legally do >>> that.
On Apr 9, 2025 at 9:15:32 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 11:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 7:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:If the Titanic had a hold full of guys like those in the pictures above,
On Apr 8, 2025 at 2:26:22 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:23 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 12:09:43 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>Google:
wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:No, they're being deported. That's what you do with illegals.
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:31 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:41:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 12:14 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 7:59:35 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:18:03 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/7/2025 3:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 12:05:38 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:How about deporting *ACCUSED* violent illegal alien criminals?
On 4/7/2025 2:36 PM, Rhino wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-04-07 12:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 7, 2025 at 1:30:50 AM PDT, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ultranationalist politicalWorse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the
Regular MSNBC guest and justice correspondent for The Nation
Elie Mystal
claimed on Tuesday that virtually all laws passed prior to 1965
should be considered "presumptively unconstitutional".
"Yes, absolutely," Mystal declared. "One of
my premises for the book
is that
every law passed before the 1965 Voting Rights Act should be
presumptively
unconstitutional, right? Because before the
1965 Voting Rights Act,
we were
functionally an apartheid country. Not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody who lived here could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote
here."
This flesh-blob and his goofy white 'fro is not only ridiculously
hard-left but he doesn't even make any sense.
First, it's *still* the case that not everyone
who lives here can vote
here. Foreign nationals, both legal and illegal, cannot vote even
if they live
here.
He says every pre-1965 law is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unconstitutional but the Constitution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself is a pre-1965 law. So this idiot must believe the
Constitution is
unconstitutional, which is a logical and legal impossibility.
Mystal often appears on MSNBC, and even joinedYes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who
network host and former
Republican National Committee Chairman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Steele just two days >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prior to
joining THE VIEW. During that appearance, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he claimed that the Trump
administration's efforts to deport criminal
illegal aliens and gang
members amounted to "fascism". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
snuck into the country
illegally and then committed more crimes against Americans while
here, and send
his ass back to wherever he came from. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure. <rolls eyes> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people now. Most of them
don't even know what the word actually means.
fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. I've seen a few cases where someone asks
them what
the word "fascist" means to them and the response is always an
embarrassed pause as they realize that they don't
know. But they never
actually seem to make an effort to find out and
keep throwing the word
around with abandon. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If they had an ounce of sincerity in them, their
leaders would figure
out that they've made the word meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and start using different
words in their rhetoric so that their statements made at least
a little
bit of sense. But I've never seen that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happen: they just keep using
"fascist" and keep weakening their statements as a result. They
become a
laughingstock as they keep making accusations of fascism which the
listener *knows* is a word they don't understand.
But hey, I'm fine with that. It just makes it
easier to tell you're
listening to a yammerhead that has no idea what
he's talking about so
that you can ignore what he's saying. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
And deporting violent illegal alien criminals >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and gang members isn't
even in
the same universe as all that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Note the key term there: illegal alien. That takes care
of everything we
legally need to deport them.
Well, your sympathetic SCOTUS is all you *legally* need.
No, under the U.S. Code that's all that's legally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. No SCOTUS
necessary.
But, if "illegal alien" does the trick, I wonder why all the other
allegations.
Politics. It's more politically palatable to deport Tren de Aragua
gangbangers
with death tattoos on their shaven heads and teeth filed down to
fangs than
it
is to deport someone's abuela making tacos on the corner.
So, concretely, they're being deported for bad haircuts and
dentistry...
Well, that and all the crime and violence. And at a basic level,
we don't
want
or need other countries' criminals. They bring nothing of value to
the U.S.
and that's a perfectly valid reason to kick their asses
the fuck out.
But, if I understand, they're only *accused* of crime
and violence.
And
THEY
ARE
ILLEGAL
ALIENS
And, ideally, in accord with traditional American principles, they
oughtn't be punished as though they'd been convicted.
THEY ARE ILLEGAL ALIENS.
But they're being PUNISHED for something else. >>>>>>>>>>>
If they were being punished, they'd be sent to prison. >>>>>>>>>>
"Deportation, or removal, is the formal process of forcing a
non-citizen to leave the United States, often due to immigration
violations or criminal convictions, and can be considered a form of
punishment."
"And can be considered"
Love that passive voice.
You can be considered to be a porpoise. Doesn't mean you'd suddenly
develop
a
taste for mackerel.
Anything "can be considered" to be anything by purposely undefined and
unidentified people with agendas.
I doubt many deportees send thank-you notes...
Well, if they don't like it, they can always stop breaking into other
people's
countries illegally.
Something unproven.
Nothing other than being an illegal need be proven. The >>>>>>>>>>> government has
discretion which illegals it wants to prioritize for >>>>>>>>>>> deportation. They
chose
violent criminal scumbags. It beggars the imagination why you'd
pick this
hill
to die on.
Umm, remember *principle*? These people are being "selected" based on
crimes they're merely *alleged* to have committed.
But they're still illegal aliens, so even if the government is wrong
and the
guy with the Satanic pentagram tattooed onto back of his shaved head
and the
demon horns embedded on his forehead and all the murders and >>>>>>>>> rapes he's
committed graffitied across his torso in coded gang language is--
against
all
odds and common sense-- not a psychopathic MS-13 thug and is just a
totally
nice guy, he's STILL AN ILLEGAL ALIEN and subject to deportation.
If I have a pool of 1000 illegals eligible for deportation and 300
of them
look like this...
https://ibb.co/LD89Khbr
https://ibb.co/sJJzZ5b7
...and most all of them have criminal records on top of it, those
are the
ones
going to the front of my "get the fuck out" line and there's nothing
either
legally or morally wrong with that. But hey, if you want to >>>>>>>>> force us to
pretend all illegals are the same, fine. We'll stop prioritizing the
violent
thugs and just start deporting them all. The abuelas and the single
moms and
all the sympathetic illegals who otherwise would get a pass are now
on the
chopping block because moviePig says we can't look at these evil
motherfuckers
and say these guys go first.
There's nothing wrong with a country saying it doesn't want other
countries'
criminals. Leftists gleefully giggled that Trump's "32 felonies"
means he
can
never visit Canada, yet you'll fight to death to keep the guys
in those
pictures above here in America.
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character... >>>>>>>
yes,
everyone else should have lifeboat priority over them.
You must wonder why we bother with a trial if the defendant's ugly...
One wonders if you're really this stupid or just playing it for effect.
You really think the officers of the Titanic are going to stop and hold a
trial for *anyone* while the ship is starting tilt bow downward?
You can't legally discriminate based on crimes that are merely alleged. >>>
'You' in this instance refers to an otherwise unconstrained enforcer of
the Constitution ...not to the captain of a sinking ship.
Dude, you were the one who brought up the Titanic and its lifeboats and tried to shame me into addressing it ("maybe you can resist deleting this one"). Now
that I've addressed it (and showed that your own analogy fails you), you suddenly don't want to talk about it anymore?
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally >and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass >back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them don't even >know what the word actually means.
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political >ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong >regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to >qualify as truly fascist?
Worse yet, most of them don't even reflect on the fact that they don't
know what "fascist" really means. They use it as a synonym for
everything they hate. . . .
To be fair, that's how I use "commie".
That's 'cos COMMIES ARE THE WORST!!!! [thumbs up (x3)]
Don't forget that there's apparently no process in place to release
someone once they are deported. At least it is being claimed that they
have no means to get El Salvador to release someone once in their
custody. So even if the Trump administration was to admit to having
sent someone to El Salvador who was innocent there would be nothing
they can do.
Go bigger!
There were no blacks in Europe during the Age of Enlightenment! It's all >invalid. Western civilization has been returned to the Dark Ages!
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 15:05:38 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist politicalIt would certainly apply to HAMAS (and of course to Stalin 1941-45)
ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition,
belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual
interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong
regimentation of society and the economy." -Wiki
How many of those dozen or so qualities are necessary for something to
qualify as truly fascist?
On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 15:43:59 -0400, shawn
<nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
Don't forget that there's apparently no process in place to release
someone once they are deported. At least it is being claimed that they
have no means to get El Salvador to release someone once in their
custody. So even if the Trump administration was to admit to having
sent someone to El Salvador who was innocent there would be nothing
they can do.
Does the US have a clause saying all non-citizens convicted of an
offense with a maximum sentence over ___ years (in Canada it's 5
years) are automatically deported at end of sentence (which may not be actually _____ years given early release or parole rules)?
Point of my question is that Canada DOES have such a rule but right
now we are having a case in the Canadian courts where the 2018
Humboldt Saskatchewan bus driver who ran a stop sign and t-boned a
team bus killing 16 people has now served his sentence and is
appealing his deportation order ... which of course is costing a ton
of money since the feds are fighting this one tooth + nail since it's politically quite an explosive case as Rhino would surely attest. (As
in 'instant political suicide for any politician who signed an order rescinding his deportation)
Let's just say there are a LOT of Canadians who know where Humboldt SK
is that didn't back in 2017.
Mon, 7 Apr 2025 20:16:01 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Go bigger!
There were no blacks in Europe during the Age of Enlightenment! It's all >>invalid. Western civilization has been returned to the Dark Ages!
Really? There were blacks in England in the 14th century which is well
before "Enlightenment"
. . .
Does the US have a clause saying all non-citizens convicted of an
offense with a maximum sentence over ___ years (in Canada it's 5
years) are automatically deported at end of sentence (which may not be >actually _____ years given early release or parole rules)?
. . .
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
. . .
Does the US have a clause saying all non-citizens convicted of an
offense with a maximum sentence over ___ years (in Canada it's 5
years) are automatically deported at end of sentence (which may not be
actually _____ years given early release or parole rules)?
Deportation isn't automatic. There's a hearing.
The two main categories of crimes that can put you at risk of
being deported are aggravated felonies and crimes involving
moral turpitude. The Immigration and Nationality Act also
enumerates certain crimes that serve as independent grounds of
deportation, even if they are not classified in one of those two
categories.
https://www.justia.com/immigration/deportation-removal/criminal-grounds-for-deportation/
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
On Apr 8, 2025 at 7:32:50 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
Here's another parallel ...maybe you can resist deleting this one:
Should the Titanic's captain have given priority to the first-class
passengers in filling the lifeboats? After all, it wouldn't have
affected the number of saved lives. Or maybe he could've simply favored
the passengers he informally judged to be of good character...
Apropos of your Titanic scenario:
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1913546869097066496/vid/avc1/576x1024/0LFJd6csNJRTavp9.mp4?tag=16
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 16:44:34 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
Yes, it's fascist to take a violent thug who snuck into the country illegally
and then committed more crimes against Americans while here, and send his ass
back to wherever he came from.
Sure. <rolls eyes>
Literally everything is "fascist" to these people now. Most of them don't even
know what the word actually means.
I tend to think a lot of the current woke sort think it means
something like
"When ze Fuhrer says dat we iss da master race, we heil we heil right
in the Fuhrer's face!"
though I've seen some who wouldn't have a clue what a Fuhrer was...
I hope you're not saying that Stalin was *only* horrible between 1941
and 1945. I've read a LOT of books about him and I can assure you he was >horrible for pretty much his entire life.
He once told Beria, the last head of the secret police (which was not
called the KGB until after Stalin died), that he (Stalin) was so
paranoid the he (Stalin) thought he (Stalin) was plotting against HIMSELF.
He once told his daughter, Svetlana, that it was a shame that Hitler had >turned on him in 1941. "Together," he said, "we could have really done
some things!"
It still boggles my mind that he killed 16 people and injured 13 but got
only 8 years in the slammer for that. Life really is cheap in this
country, isn't it? Mind you, if he'd shot people with a gun, he'd still
only get a 25 year sentence no matter how many he'd shot before he'd be >eligible for parole. I'm hoping that changes if Poilievre wins the >election....
Does the US have a clause saying all non-citizens convicted of an
offense with a maximum sentence over ___ years (in Canada it's 5
years) are automatically deported at end of sentence (which may not be >>actually _____ years given early release or parole rules)?
Deportation isn't automatic. There's a hearing.
The two main categories of crimes that can put you at risk of
being deported are aggravated felonies and crimes involving
moral turpitude. The Immigration and Nationality Act also
enumerates certain crimes that serve as independent grounds of
deportation, even if they are not classified in one of those two
categories.
https://www.justia.com/immigration/deportation-removal/criminal-grounds-for-deportation/
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
Mon, 7 Apr 2025 20:16:01 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Go bigger!
There were no blacks in Europe during the Age of Enlightenment! It's all >>>invalid. Western civilization has been returned to the Dark Ages!
Really? There were blacks in England in the 14th century which is well >>before "Enlightenment"
Only in the Shondaverse!
Mon, 28 Apr 2025 20:30:24 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Does the US have a clause saying all non-citizens convicted of an
offense with a maximum sentence over ___ years (in Canada it's 5
years) are automatically deported at end of sentence (which may not be >>>actually _____ years given early release or parole rules)?
Deportation isn't automatic. There's a hearing.
The two main categories of crimes that can put you at risk of
being deported are aggravated felonies and crimes involving
moral turpitude. The Immigration and Nationality Act also
enumerates certain crimes that serve as independent grounds of
deportation, even if they are not classified in one of those two
categories.
https://www.justia.com/immigration/deportation-removal/criminal-grounds-for-deportation/
Am surprised - usually US courts are more bloody minded that Canadian
courts where the judge does not have authority to deny a deportation
order for someone convicted of a major offence (which I >think< is any
crime carrying a sentence of 3 years or more).
Now getting the order and actully executing the order are two
different things....
Mon, 28 Apr 2025 20:10:13 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
Mon, 7 Apr 2025 20:16:01 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
Go bigger!
There were no blacks in Europe during the Age of Enlightenment! It's all >>>>invalid. Western civilization has been returned to the Dark Ages!
Really? There were blacks in England in the 14th century which is well >>>before "Enlightenment"
Only in the Shondaverse!
Not according to Black Tudors the Untold Story (which I've read)
https://nvdplib.ca.iiivega.com/search/card?id=ee9753d8-5451-5bcf-8643-236180514525&entityType=FormatGroup
Not according to Black Tudors the Untold Story (which I've read)
https://nvdplib.ca.iiivega.com/search/card?id=ee9753d8-5451-5bcf-8643-236180514525&entityType=FormatGroup
I know. Shonda Rhimes cited this to prove her drama -- with modern >sensibilities and modern hair -- is historically accurate. Anything that >might resemble history is the merest of coincidence.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 164:38:42 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,518 |