Ayanna Pressley, the at-large city councilor who is running against incumbent US Rep Mike Capuano in the Seventh District, says it's time to bust up ICE, Boston Magazine reports.
We have an elected individual who’s an anarchist. This isn’t a rational proposal and I hope it stays with her until election time.
but I don't think you know what they mean.
"You crossed this imaginary line while jogging, so you're going to be locked in a cage for two weeks."
Therefore, I wouldn't expect anything different.
who was deported from Boston about a year ago on account of being an illegal was really deported because of latent anti-Irish bigotry on the part of ICE? Couldn't possibly be that laws are meant to be followed, and that border enforcement means border enforcement.
Tell me more about Trump and emoluments.
What with the burden of proof being on the accuser and all. Then you can tell me what that has to do with border enforcement. And then you can try to tell me with a straight face that if instead of Trump it was the most boyscoutiest guy you could imagine with an R next to his name that you wouldn't be trotting out the swastikas and the holocaust comparisons.
blah blah blah we have rule of law in this country blah blah
Soooo...what about the emoluments clause?
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING HITLER HOLOCAUST RAWR
You are, as always, a clever-but-stupid piece of work.
"Laws are meant to be followed." Why isn't the president following the law with regard to the emoluments clause? The record on this is out there in a quick Google search and I'm not going to do your homework for you.
But, also, triggered much, snowflake?
One of our laws states that when people come to a border post and ask for asylum, the guards are supposed to register them and start an asylum application process, and let them in, after evaluating whether they should be detained for the duration, or just let in free.
Trump's BCP on the Brownsville Matamoros bridge has been ignoring the asylum law, and literally ignoring the asylum applicants, which is why they've been crossing elsewhere.
How about we be a little less selective on which laws to enforce and which to ignore?
Property lines are imaginary too, if you want to be technical about it. We all just make an effort to imagine them in unison.
I wouldn't insist that somebody be jailed for two weeks for jogging onto it one time. Nor do I perceive that as any kind of persistent problem, because where I come from, the posting of a "no trespassing" sign is not uncommon and is thoroughly respected.
Hell, I can assure you that the woman in question (or really any female jogger) is welcome to come around my way.
But if she said "they're outta here, word to your mother", I will give her campaign $10.
This would never happen. Should we get rid of the borders separating us from Canada & Mexico too? & just make the three of us one big country?? Doesn't make any sense. Trump is too harsh on this issue but there does needs to be some sort of immigration enforcement.
How ever did we handle immigration and customs issues at the border before ICE was created in 2003?
Not sure what gosharootie means but she is advocating eliminating ICE with no plan for an alternative method to offer some sort of border security. Doesn’t sound very responsible but I’m sure it’ll play well in the current climate.
Gosharootie is an old phrase, you know, like darn tootin' and so's yer ol' man, 23 skidoo.
As for her alternatives, consarn it all and tarnation, I provided a link to a Boston Magazine article that explains how she would replace whatever legitimate work ICE does. Would you like some help on how to click on a link?
I did click and I read. I saw her plan to continue him at trafficking but no plan for border security or immigration enforcement. So maybe my reading comprehension is poor or you’re just too busy being snarky to read your own article your linked to.
I saw her plan to continue him at trafficking
So maybe my reading comprehension is poor or you're just too busy trying to get a shot back at Adam to write a coherent sentence. Try again?
ICE doesn't even operate at the border anyway. That's CBP.
... before the income tax was instituted? May as well ask that. Times change and sometimes solutions do as a result.
But disingenuous arguments in favor of an unjust status quo never seem to go away
They showed up at Ellis Island, confirmed that they didn't have TB or anarchist literature, and that was enough.
Then, a few years after they got here, for some reason* that wasn't enough anymore.
*because the immigrants started to be Chinese and other not-European
It wasn't all that long ago that the Irish (among other European groups) were looked down upon and somewhat feared the way Latinos are viewed today by a sizable amount of the population.
There are a lot of white people (not all, and probably not most, but still a lot) who are afraid of losing their majority status. That is what unifies Trump's base largely. And this is why they hate Latinx's.
that's because you have hate on the brain.
In your mind, is it possible let for anyone to be in favor of strict border enforcement for any reason other than hatred? Is it possible in your mind for people to be motivated by philosophical reasons, like the need to maintain the rule of law that we all (I think) agree is essential to our material prosperity, physical security, and intellectual liberty? Does that at all compute for you, or are those just more dog whistles and nothing more?
In your mind, is it possible let for anyone to be in favor of strict border enforcement for any reason other than hatred?
"Strict border enforcement" doesn't mean arresting and detaining asylum applicants and taking away their children. It never has.
It has also never meant raiding fields in Hatfield for agricultural workers but never taking a pass through the IV.
That's all I needed to read from the guy who foams at the mouth when it comes to anyone to the left of him.
There's that pesky rule of law again. Please see my comment, to which you painfully whined about, regarding following the law written about the emoluments clause.
Now tell us about the Irish Exclusion Act.
No doubt they were looked down on - my Italian ancestors dealt with the same thing. But only the Japanese and now the Central American immigrants have been thrown into camps, as far as I've ever heard. Being distrusted by the "natives" and being persecuted as a matter of course by the government are two pretty different things.
If you meant to cite Camp Kilmer's use to house refugees from Hungary as equivalent to what's happening now on the southern border, you blew it.
"In the fall of 1950, with hostilities in Korea, the camp was reactivated. It was placed on inactive status again in June 1955. In November 1956 it served as an initial place for housing for refugees from the 1956 Hungarian Revolution until June 1957. In March 1958, Camp Kilmer became Headquarters for the U.S. Army II Corps, the controlling headquarters for United States Army Reserve units across the northeast. Camp Kilmer also housed a maintenance and repair facility supporting the Nike/Hercules missile sites in the greater New York metropolitan area. This facility included large, armored rooms with heavy blast doors where missile engines and conventional warheads were stored and maintained.
"During the Cold War after the failed 1956 Hungarian Revolution 30,000 refugees were resettled at Camp Kilmer. Many settled in New Brunswick, which had a thriving Hungarian American community in its Fifth Ward." from wikipedia
IOW, they were housed in a formerly deactivated military base to initially accommodate them. They were allowed to resettle. They were not separated from their children.
And the American Frontier has faded away. That changed too.
Did you just call Slavs and Italians "not-European?"
Please read up on the Immigration Act of 1924 and the work of the Immigration Restriction League before commenting on the changes in the immigration laws in the early twentieth century.
Many 'white' immigrants in that period were quaranteened (sp?) to prevent possible epidemics of diseases. And many died and buried in mass graves, sometimes unmarked.
You are also apparantly unaware that no welfare state 'entitlements' existed prior to 1965 (minus social security), and legal limmigrants had to be vouched for by a responsable U.S. citizen. This sponsor was responsible to care for this immigrant if they couldn't find gainful employment, became homeless, etc., not the government.
You also failed to mention that from the 1920s onwards immigration was reduced to a trickle due to a poor economy and the desire to get the many millions of immugrants the U.S. had to assimilate. From 1965 onwards, after the Immigration 'Reform' Act, it's become very difficult for Europeans to immigrate to the U.S., and easy for immigrants from 'poor' and predominately people of color countries. 52 years this has been the situation. And correspondingly, our welfare state was created during this exact same time period.
Finally, the U.S. is not the so called developing nation it was 150-100 years ago. We're a developed, 1st world post-industrial nation with very real limited need for millions of semi and unskilled, poorly educated people.
That attempted migration over the southern border was at a 40-year low even before Dear Leader got all cagey, and that without migrants, our crops will rot in the fields and our meals will not get cooked/served in our restaurants.
Your motivation for lax border enforcement is that you want people to do menial I labor for you? What contortions do you need to put yourself through to convince yourself that's not slavery in all but name?
Is that somebody doesn't get locked in a cage for two weeks for jogging. Note my use of "more."
There's a middle ground between somebody walking past in a ski mask with a rifle without anybody batting an eye and shutting down 93 to check everybody's nationality when most of the folks are just trying to enjoy a nice summer weekend. For Chrissakes, let's as a people (expletive) occupy middle ground one Goddamn time in 2018.
there’s the whole payment for their work thing, and that it’s voluntary labor.
Other than that, I totally see your point.
My motivation for lax border enforcement is so that my tax money doesn't go towards institutionalized child abuse.
Immigration slowed to a trickle due to the law I referenced above. It was the first establishment of a quota system for immigration. Agree with or disagree with it, you cannot deny that the quota reduced immigration. Trust me, the refugees fleeing the real Nazis in the 1930s would have kept the numbers up if it were possible.
Dismantle ICE, the laws still stay the same and the Justice Department (who along with Customs was in charge of this before ICE) will just absorb former ICE employees and they will then enforce the same laws that are still on the books.
Is she pulling a Tito here and just realizing she has nothing left and wants to take the long shot approach?
Nobody's informed current Congressman Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, who just announced he will introduce a bill to do exactly this
This guy has been in office since 2013. He has the political room to grandstand and not be affected by it.
Still, he would be better off changing the actual law (from a crime to a civil infraction that isn't arrestable.)
IT IS A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR
We know you are a fascist, but at least get your legal situation straight - Drumpf unilaterally declared it to be more than that.
Which he legally cannot.
I hope you are hitting the gym so that you can keep up with that arm salute thing.
Are federal misdemeanors arrestable or not......in MA most are, and carry house of correction terms up to 2.5 years in prison.
Your ad hominem attacks are cute, but still desperate.
The point is that eliminating Ice does nothing. Nothing.
"grandstanding," then maybe it's not grandstanding to begin with.
Pete's just having some trouble containing himself at that thought that any one person can just make up laws that congress hasn't passed and enact them using lots of guys with lots of weapons pushing people around.
This is like icehub for him.
Presenting at the border and asking for asylum is legal.
Crossing the border is a Class B Misdemeanor.
Congress has the right to make these laws, not Beauregard, not Drumpf. Congress has not changed these laws.
Are misdemeanors arrestable like they are in MA?
That is the question.
You're really not up on current events, are you?
"At the U.S. border, asylum seekers fleeing violence are told to come back later"
All that article says is that people who come to border checkpoints to seek asylum are not arrested but told to come back later. No crime committed. Different story and different issue.
"Presenting at the border and asking for asylum is legal.
Crossing the border is a Class B Misdemeanor."
And the reason these migrants are doing the latter is that when they present themselves at the border and ask for asylum, they are ignored. WHICH IS ITSELF ILLEGAL
Um, what reality are you living in that he could even get that passed with a Republican controlled house, senate, and presidency? Might as well shoot for the moon.
That's the whole point of this article. Just cheap talk going on.
I don't know why you consider it "cheap talk." Attacking ICE may be low hanging fruit, but there are two things to consider if you concede that. One, they don't provide much value to either law or immigration enforcement, and, two, the notion already has legitimate momentum.
First, every country needs some sort of enforcement of immigration issues. People just aren't happy with the way this agency is being run.
Second, If you "defunded" it, what do you think would happen in reality? Every ICE worker just doesn't show up to work some day and everyone goes free? Does the criminal drug trafficker just get to come in? We can't do what every other country does because every other country has an enforcement entity in some form or the other.
In the end this is about Pressley ending her political career in a desperate fashion like Tito did.
We'll track this issue and see if it ends it or not. That's entirely your take on it and I haven't heard anyone else going nearly as far. And, like I said, this isn't grandstanding and there are other politicians onboard with doing something similar with ICE.
With regard to your first two paragraphs, I offered nothing as to what happens with immigration enforcement or what happens to those employed by ICE afterwards. Mainly because I wasn't speaking to that. But immigration enforcement happened before ICE and it will happen still if ICE is broken up. ICE doesn't exactly have a great track record since its inception, but I don't think it's worth my time, or yours, to get into an argument on the merits of ICE or its history in this comment chain. All I'll say is that ICE was formed as a reaction to a perceived need for elevated "national security" after 9/11, not in response to an immigration crisis. I think that speaks for itself.
I offered nothing as to what happens with immigration enforcement or what happens to those employed by ICE afterwards.
Neither was she. That is why this is political grandstanding.
In the big picture, Pressley is an outsider, and outsiders do not fare well once they challenge the establishment and give up their previous position in doing so (See Yoon and Tito who isn't even an outsider). Just my opinion.
An agency which those who felt that illegally entering the country wasn't a big deal had an issue with in the 1980s and 1990s.
It is foolish grandstanding to say that the agency that enforces our immigration and customs laws should be done away with. A real leader would instead point out positive ways ICE could be reformed to do their jobs without being immoral. Or conversely, a real leader would be able to craft a bill that somehow handles issues with our current immigration law that has the entire political spectrum up in arms (for vastly different reasons, of course.)
Dismantling ICE is the left wing version of dismantling the IRS as the right crows. It's the same thing.
So why can't I fly, since I have two wings?
...but that didn't mean they should keep the Gestapo.
ICE has become evil. It's time for it to evaporate.
A police force who puts people in an oven or shoots them in the head versus ICE. (I would be for prison time for anyone who negligently lost a kid or abused one in this current system).
But still, Germany changed their laws, and put war criminals on trial.
And like I said above. You get rid of the "gestapo", Trump will put those same people in other positions.
Which is exactly what we're advocating for here. Kidnapping a child? 20 year sentence. There are thousands of kids missing, thanks to our very own army of brown shirts. Disband the organization and prosecute the offenders for their crimes.
The goal of ICE is sending people home. Exterminating people nazi-style is not the same as deporting them back to their home countries, where they hold all the benefits and privileges of citizenship.
The extreme left of the immigration debate seems to hold a mentality that Life in the USA: good. Life south of the USA: bad. As if sending people home to Central/South America is worse than death. It's like "white man's burden" on a national scale.
Have I got a deal for you - there's this land that is kind of sort of just off shore and a little wet and you can buy it cheap and build there and ....
I'm only mentioning this because you seem to be the sort of person who could believe in this ...
The goal of ICE is whatever the government tells it to be. And right now that goal is blocking people from legally seeking asylum and locking them up in cages. The goal temporarily is no longer to put take children away from parents and lock them up in separate cages, but that could change just as easily soon.
As if sending people home to Central/South America is worse than death.
In some cases, it is. You might want to read up on why people seek asylum in the US - and why, until recently, we often granted it.
ICE's methods may have changed. It's goal and mission has not.
[it]In some cases, it is. You might want to read up on why people seek asylum in the US - and why, until recently, we often granted it.[/it]
Often granted? The vast majority of asylum claims are denied. Guatemala and El Salvador both have an unemployment rate of a few percent, and both have populations growing at a steady rate. They're not wastelands or bombed out war zones. People live there.
The goal of ICE is sending people home
It's not supposed to be. That's not what our Immigration and Customs Enforcement is supposed to be for. Not turning away asylum seekers. Not detaining asylum seekers and taking their children. "Sending people home" is NOT what ICE is supposed to be doing.
The question is what is 'home' for any particular
person: inside the USA, or in a foreign country.
They haven't ... yet.
They have summarily executed citizens of Mexico who were not even across the border. Kind of like the good old days when cops went "coon huntin". Ya get to kill people and NO CONSEQUENCES. Wheeee!
Citations needed please.
Note that several of these - including a 2012 murder - were by US agents killing people who were not on US land (some do seem justified - others were "off duty" and involved non-duty activities like getting into drunken fights while armed with their service weapons).
Yes, at least the Canadian border.
If countries in Europe that were blowing each other up 75 years ago can allow seamless travel, why should we have a military-style blockade and interrogation when you enter from Canada?
ICE has too much power and causes too much fear. They destroy families and communities. There *must* be a better way to manage immigration in ways that aren't violent, predatory, and destructive. How many millions or billions are we spending on enforcers and detainment camps and breaking families apart.
Like a wall and less permissive tourist visas from certain countries where the population are likely to overstay.
I almost took you seriously throughout this entire thread, too. I didn't even demand that you put a dollar in the jar for citing the rule of law, because I don't think we're all clear on immigration laws, and the different contexts for American entry.
Hell, I've said for a long time that I think it's such a thorny issue in America in large part because few, if any, civilians appear to be clear on what the strike zone is for who can be here, and for how long, and who can't come in at all. My brother married his wife in part because she was going to have to go back to France, and she went to frickin' college and worked in a law office. If that's not a strike for who gets to stay, I don't know what is.
But you've lost me by saying the magic word. AIRPLANES CAN FLY OVER WALLS. We don't have a problem controlling the border. We have plenty of personnel and a (expletive) laser which tracks when a person has crossed the border. We also have a Coast Guard should they endeavor to float in.
This country doesn't have an immigration problem. We spend an obscene amount of money on defense, and we nominally get something of value. Our border patrol and coast guard ain't cheap, but they deliver what they promise. They did nab the jogger and toss her in jail, after all. I didn't petition my Congresspeople to establish a jogger-catching force, or want for them to do that, but they did the job they get paid to do, even if it's a (expletive) mission.
What we have is an emigration problem. We don't appear to kick the bad ones back out with any kind of efficiency or lasting force. We had Tamerlan gone, mind you. He came right back in.
A living human is going to occupy terra firma somewhere. Typically, they respond to the incentives of worthwhile currency and employment, and end up here, and in Germany. A shame that we end up playing hot potato with humans.
We also have a Coast Guard should they endeavor to float in.
Problem is, Drumpf has asked to almost entirely defund it under the guise of paying for his hairbrained wall stupidity, because the Coasties' drug interdiction activities interfere with some of his "business" interests, like that laundry he was running in Panama.
[Gotta wonder exactly how effed up the situation is when our boy Will here becomes such a consistent voice of reason.]
less permissive tourist visas from certain countries where the population are likely to overstay
Yeah. About that...
Cap has been great to the area for YEARS! ...and has stood against unwarranted Ice raids in the past.
Pressley doesn't stand a chance and is just trying to make noise to win over some votes.
If Pressley "didn't stand a chance", Capuano would not have pulled John Lewis out of his ass for an endorsement.
Regarding John Lewis as if he's disposable, dude.
I've been wracking my brain this morning looking for the part in the post where I claimed Lewis was "disposable"?
You're really oblivious to yourself.
Not oblivious to the fact that Capuano has a woman challenger of color who is gaining in popularity and is a threat to Mike's longstanding position and why wouldn't he or someone in the DCCC ask an icon like Lewis to look after one of his own?
And I mean Capuano.
I know this link won't impress anyone who thought Obama was a Kenyan Marxist or that Stephen Miller is making America great again...but for the benefit of those who aren't sure about this ICE business and have a vague sense something not good is happening, here's a brief overview of how we got here:
ICE was designed from the start to be a super-efficient streamlined machine to deport nonwhite people and criminalize immigration as much as they could get away with. Mashing all those formerly disparate departments together helps them avoid pesky outmoded things like court oversight and due process and fair hearings. Breaking it up and restoring all those separate departments won't make our borders disappear or open the door to terrorists and gang members. It will just go a little bit towards restoring much needed oversight. The industries making a fortune off running private detention facilities will fight tooth and nail to protect ICE; always remember people are making big bucks off dehumanizing brown people and a lot of the rhetorical flummery will be exposed for what it is.
Did ICE write immigration law?
It looks to be that their role is enforcement of the immigration laws passed by Congress. If the issue is deporting nonwhite people and criminalizing immigration, that’s on Congress for passing the laws in force.
The same law was passed years ago, yet the interpretation of it from Clinton, Bush, Obama had never changed until Trump. Shifting the blame to Congress when the record clearly shows this is a new, gratuitous interpretation from this administration, especially with all of the reporting on this issue and precise topic, is effectively gaslighting.
I know you consider yourself something of a non-partisan straight shooter, and I'd agree you're tough but fair, generally, but this is a hot take. And also, considering that Congress has been Republican majority since the Tea Party sweep, it's hard to blame anyone but the GOP for the status quo.
My point is that ICE enforces the law. They did is under Obama. They did it under Bush 43. They're doing it under Trump. They don't make any of the laws they enforce. The problem is not with ICE. The problem is with the politicians. They make the laws.
ICE enforces the law selectively, and bends/breaks the law, according to the whims of whoever is running them.
"whoever is running them." But even at that, much like any administration, legal yoga takes place so that the law would technically be followed. To give two examples, the previous administration could never decree that people here illegally could stay in the US; but they did, through the DACA program, defer on enforcement. Conversely, this administration followed the letter of the law with enforcement against adults crossing the border illegally and children crossing the border illegally, with a policy technically legal but very questionably moral.
What they're doing now is enforcement of a new policy direction from the same law under a different administration. Now I do believe you're trying to gaslight. Your statement reads as if the law is clear as day. It's not. Unless you need a civics lesson to why we have an entire system of appeals courts that get into the weeds and interpret the laws and what they mean.
It's in the enforcement. Obama was lax in his enforcement while Trump is overly strict. In the end, they have to base their actions on the law or what is permissible under the law. ICE carries out what the administration wants it to do, though they must act within the constraints of the law.
At the end of the day, Trump can deport anyone who is not in the country legally, while Obama could only defer deportation. Most people have noted that it is pretty impractical to deport everyone who is here illegally, but that would be what the law allows.
In short, blame the game, not the players.
Trump isn't "overly" strict. Come on man, you're trying to have your cake and eat it too with this argument. There's nothing in the law that says anything about how strict you have to be and that sort of discretion is entirely in the hands of the players, as you put it. But trying to frame this as a crafted "game" by Congress is being rather gratuitous to your argument.
It's almost like you're saying "The law is the law and we have to follow it except when we don't really want to and we can just enforce the policies we want and only the ones we want." There's basically no consistency between that statement and virtue signaling over "rule of law." At least there isn't in effect.
That's the problem. They not only think they are above the law and beyond the law, they think that they ARE the law.
They usurp the rights of the courts, and ignore court orders and judgements left and right so that they can make their own "administrative rules" to quickly remove citizenship and rights from immigrants.
Pull your head out honey - your time will come.
ICE is nothing more than the brownshirt deportation force Trump promised to his idiot followers on the trail.
So now these thick necked morons, most of who couldn't cut it as mall security, now have been taken off their leashes by their new racist master and his lapdog, Tom Homan. Homan, who when asked about the morality of his actions, simply stared into the camera with eyes red from alcohol and said he was enforcing the law. This from a man who works for the biggest criminal to ever disgrace the White House.
deport nonwhite people and criminalize immigration
Those are opposites. You either deport, or imprison. Not both.
Have you not been paying attention? All the MAGAts have been braying like the jackasses that they are about "what part of ILLEGAL don't you understand" and "we are a nation of laws" (like that matters when their Fuehrer yells "Knock the crap out of 'em"). They manufacturer a criminal offense out of a civil violation; that's what "criminalize" means, for the vocabulary challenged. Then they use that as an excuse to do WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT.
Be careful which side you choose in this. Your grandkids will ask about what you did in this time.
it's a fluke?
Or someone outed him as a homosexual?
Or you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth, came of age in a time of plenty in the greatest country on this Earth, have never known any real hardship, and need to invent racists and Nazis and dragons to fight to make yourself feel important?
Looks like he needs to...imagine dragons.
Fuck you mean, “greatest country on Earth “? Look at the mortality and literacy rates in parts of this great country. “Greatest country “ my ass.
People here are free to succeed and free to fail. That's a good thing.
But I'll grant you this place isn't all smiles and sunshine.
For example, if it weren't for your jackbooted fellow travellers throwing riots at the sight of people they disagree with out minding their own business, this would be unambiguously the greatest country on Earth.
These are the same people who have never minded when the media chased their ass and they had time to stop and chat a tell a few lies to the impotent nitwits that make up TV political "journalists".
Now they're getting the attention they don't like from Americans who don't give a shit about their Q ratings and now they're all up in arms? If Mr Rogers was alive he probably would have tossed Pam Bondi out of his movie himself, no?
Also, may you missed the many times the orange idiot incited violence himself among the poorly educated he loves so much at his rallies?
...comin' right up!
I dunno, Roman, seems like they invented themselves. Better get your glasses checked, son. Or are you just a disingenuous liar?
Recent ICE activity indicates that even being a naturalized citizen won't protect you.
When they come for you.
I'm chomping at the bit for that...
No matter how much schadenfreude could be found in it, it would also be a sign of how the American dream has been utterly destroyed by greed, racism, and militaristic totalitarianism.
You don't want to do a few days in a tanning bed, jump on a plane to San Diego, throw on some shitty clothes and a do-rag and leave your ID at home and see what happens when you're picked up in a raid and they find out who you really are?
Or do you just want to take a ride up 93 and wait to tell an ICE goon when they ask your status to fuck him or herself?
Either one I'm down for...
But OTOH, no more Roman. I admit I'm torn.
I'm only a few veiled threats of violence away from having enough to get an unrestricted LTC on the grounds that anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant online trolls make me fear for my safety.
when you are one.
Those threats aren't veiled, and they aren't coming from UHub
History more than adequately demonstrates that they are coming from an administration and its policies that you support.
You are a fool if you can't see that commentators pointing this out to you aren't threatening you in the least - THEY ARE TRYING TO WARN YOU of the natural history of such things.
Read up on what happened to Jews who supported Bolshevism. Or certain Cubans who supported Castro before he moved to consolidate power. The decade is different, the locale is less exotic, but the story is the same time after time.
Whatever it is, it seems to be different from before because you're no longer hallucinating that it's the moon Nazis that will be the end of me.
If you are a naturalized citizen, ICE has usurped the right of local prosecutors and is stripping people of their citizenship and deporting them because they don't like their kind.
Since they get lots of civil forfeiture goodies when they do this, don't think for a minute that you are too special for them to target.
“We’re a nation of laws”. Must be hard to see them working.
...that calls for incarcerating asylum seekers. Do that, cupcake. I'll wait.
Probably between the part about making an asylum claim at a port of entry and the part about anyone including citizens being required to cross at a port of entry instead of hopping g the dance and crying about getting caught.
You are welcome in my home, but if you try to come in unannounced at 2am through the window, you do so at your own peril.
IIRC, Kevin Cullen wrote of the sob story of the deported, Irish alleged "electrician" and received plenty of blowback from real, licensed electricians who had no record of the deported man being a licensed electrician. If the Irishman was fiddling with wires and electricity without a license, that's a lot more serious and deadly than a landscaper or maid here illegally. I know many members of Local 103 who went through the five year licensing process were incensed with the story.
I'm not sure if the Globe's "comprehensive" investigation into Cullen looked at that one but an electrician license is just as easily looked up as a marathon finisher.
This is the first I heard of Japanese being placed in concentration camps although I know that Americans of Japanese descent were placed there by Democrats. Big difference. In many cases they were longtime, productive U.S. citizen landowners and had been born here or gone through the process.
On the main issue, Pressley is brilliant to "out liberal" Capuano since the winner of the Democrat primary will win the seat. She should also call for impeachment and a ban on all Republicans in local restaurants. Outrageous to eliminate ICE but should play well in the cheese shops. Capuano might have to repeat his phrase "it's time to get bloody in the streets."
You've managed it again... in a thread about literal brownshirts holding children in literal concentration camps, you've managed to make yourself the worst person in the room. It's no small feat, keeping your claim as King of Shit Mountain, but I see you're not one to let daunting tasks slow you down.
Is to stop after two paragraphs. That's where he makes his left turn on two wheels. He spoke wisely about journalistic fact-checking before he went off on the history lesson.
Remember when Charlie Faker told the story about the fisherman from Gloucester who story of the hardships of his job made Faker cry? It turns out Faker made the whole thing up. Reporters searched for the alleged fisherman,but he didn't exist.
And btw Fishy when did Pressley say all Republicans should be banned from local restaurants? Are you trying to tell bigger lies than your Orange idol?
She should also call for impeachment and a ban on all Republicans in local restaurants.
Is there a downside?
Inching closer and closer to an honest to God civil war? Could that be a downside?
You're insane and possibly dangerous unless that was meant as a joke.
This here is Scratchie. He's our resident wiseass.
We're all insane. Some manifest it more conspicuously than others.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Copyright 2019 by Adam Gaffin and by content posters.Advertise | About Universal Hub | Contact | Privacy