Far left judges need to study the law. Anybody who simply reads the Constitution is a leg up. There’s no reason to try to out think simple words. It’s not a difficult read
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
The document is written for citizens. Every word. Not sure why that’s difficult to understand? Where do you see it’s written for the Scottish? How could you ever draw that conclusion from reading this paper or believing we just said FU to the Brits and then wrote a document of freedom for them?
In your World view, by extension, there is no reason for a border, yet that’s the very thing we fought for. Then we sat down and wrote a Declaration of Independence for the Chinese? There would never have been a process to come here and it would never have been a federal offense to come here. Ever, for any reason. That was not an American way to think then and then is all that matters when discussing the Constitution. The question of who they wrote it for is not a serious debate, it’s fantasy.
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
The document is written for citizens. Every word. Not sure why that’s difficult to understand? Where do you see it’s written for the Scottish? How could you ever draw that conclusion from reading this paper or believing we just said FU to the Brits and then wrote a document of freedom for them?
In your World view, by extension, there is no reason for a border, yet that’s the very thing we fought for. Then we sat down and wrote a Declaration of Independence for the Chinese? There would never have been a process to come here and it would never have been a federal offense to come here. Ever, for any reason. That was not an American way to think then and then is all that matters when discussing the Constitution. The question of who they wrote it for is not a serious debate, it’s fantasy.
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
The document is written for citizens. Every word. Not sure why that’s difficult to understand? Where do you see it’s written for the Scottish? How could you ever draw that conclusion from reading this paper or believing we just said FU to the Brits and then wrote a document of freedom for them?
In your World view, by extension, there is no reason for a border, yet that’s the very thing we fought for. Then we sat down and wrote a Declaration of Independence for the Chinese? There would never have been a process to come here and it would never have been a federal offense to come here. Ever, for any reason. That was not an American way to think then and then is all that matters when discussing the Constitution. The question of who they wrote it for is not a serious debate, it’s fantasy.
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
HA!!!!! good one, lol. Man you’re nuts but that can be a good thing. keeps the World spinning. Did you read the big dogs Art of the Deal yet, or just use Wikipedia to get what you need?
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
HA!!!!! good one, lol. Man you’re nuts but that can be a good thing. keeps the World spinning. Did you read the big dogs Art of the Deal yet, or just use Wikipedia to get what you need?
Can you highlight the part of the constitution that says due process only applies to citizens? I couldn’t find it. This should be easy, as “it’s not a difficult read”.
HA!!!!! good one, lol. Man you’re nuts but that can be a good thing. keeps the World spinning. Did you read the big dogs Art of the Deal yet, or just use Wikipedia to get what you need?
Double post.
This post was edited 36 seconds after it was posted.
HA!!!!! good one, lol. Man you’re nuts but that can be a good thing. keeps the World spinning. Did you read the big dogs Art of the Deal yet, or just use Wikipedia to get what you need?
What’s the second word of the fifth amendment?
p.s. it’s not a difficult read.
Quite simple actually, Person is singular for People, the third word when it all started as a document for the American people. They wanted to form a more perfect union. Americans are indeed people. So glad you caught it. I suppose they could have used an alternative like mọi người but, nope, they just called us People. Guess they thought English was a better choice. that’s one thing we kept from the Brit’s, hats off to them.
Not sure why that defies logic for you. But darn sure glad you weren’t counted on to be a Minuteman. The greatest fighting force in History would’ve been milktoast.
Why is the Republican party allowed to participate in elections? If you bring false information then you are essentially sabotaging free ande democratic elections. They should start over and make a political party that doesn't attack the fundamentals of democracy
Why is the Republican party allowed to participate in elections? If you bring false information then you are essentially sabotaging free ande democratic elections. They should start over and make a political party that doesn't attack the fundamentals of democracy
Why is the Democrat party allowed to participate in elections? They lied to the American people for 4 years insisting the southern border was secure while 12 million illegals sauntered into the country.
Quite simple actually, Person is singular for People, the third word when it all started as a document for the American people. They wanted to form a more perfect union. Americans are indeed people. So glad you caught it. I suppose they could have used an alternative like mọi người but, nope, they just called us People. Guess they thought English was a better choice. that’s one thing we kept from the Brit’s, hats off to them.
Not sure why that defies logic for you. But darn sure glad you weren’t counted on to be a Minuteman. The greatest fighting force in History would’ve been milktoast.
So you do know that “people” and “citizen” are different words. The writers of the constitution could have said citizen as the second word of the fifth amendment. They did not. Thus, logic (which you lack) and the courts both agree that the fifth amendment applies to noncitizens (who are also “people”). The rest of your post says more about your drinking problem than anything related to the discussion at hand.
Yet, no one thinks that the Founders had in mind British, French, or future Mexicans, Salvadorans, or Venezuelans.
The Haitians were a contemporary Founders problem.
They didn't want them here either.
Just to underscore how stupid you are:
Article 2, Section 1:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President…
If “person”’only referred to citizens, then the “except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States” would be unnecessary. This clearly shows that the writers of the constitution considered “person” and “citizen” to be different.
Why is the Republican party allowed to participate in elections? If you bring false information then you are essentially sabotaging free ande democratic elections. They should start over and make a political party that doesn't attack the fundamentals of democracy
We have. MAGA. back to the roots of how it all began.
Yet, no one thinks that the Founders had in mind British, French, or future Mexicans, Salvadorans, or Venezuelans.
The Haitians were a contemporary Founders problem.
They didn't want them here either.
Actually, everybody (that matters) thinks that “people” refers to noncitizens. As you noted, it’s not “We the citizens…”
There was no need, they were speaking to Americans. Not one thought going through the Founders minds was for the Canadians. Still isn’t. that’s just a liberal thing so they can spin any argument. It’s just stupid to debate. the debate was settled in 1776
Actually, everybody (that matters) thinks that “people” refers to noncitizens. As you noted, it’s not “We the citizens…”
There was no need, they were speaking to Americans. Not one thought going through the Founders minds was for the Canadians. Still isn’t. that’s just a liberal thing so they can spin any argument. It’s just stupid to debate. the debate was settled in 1776
Anybody see the jobs report?
Make it even easier for the fools. forget the 3rd word, look at the very first one. We.
there was not one Venezuelan in that room. The group of We were Americans. it’s such a simple read.
There was no need, they were speaking to Americans. Not one thought going through the Founders minds was for the Canadians. Still isn’t. that’s just a liberal thing so they can spin any argument. It’s just stupid to debate. the debate was settled in 1776
Anybody see the jobs report?
Make it even easier for the fools. forget the 3rd word, look at the very first one. We.
there was not one Venezuelan in that room. The group of We were Americans. it’s such a simple read.
It is a a simple read. "No person". Not "No citizen", nor "No American."
There weren't any women in the room either. Does that mean the constitution doesn't apply to women?
There were no Jews in the room. Does the constitution not apply to Jews?
Make it even easier for the fools. forget the 3rd word, look at the very first one. We.
there was not one Venezuelan in that room. The group of We were Americans. it’s such a simple read.
It is a a simple read. "No person". Not "No citizen", nor "No American."
There weren't any women in the room either. Does that mean the constitution doesn't apply to women?
There were no Jews in the room. Does the constitution not apply to Jews?
Keep demonstrating your red state ignorance.
Dude, we have borders. we have always had borders and We are The People. Your argument is uneducated. A 3rd grader understands this.
There was no mention of Due Process for Jan 6 defendants who rotted in jail. None. I cannot remember one of you fools ever mentioning the term.
The Constitution is not to be twisted case by case for liberal needs. That’s why we kept it simple and easy to understand and why the English term We was used as the first word. We are the citizens dip shlt.
This is hill liberals will die on and deservedly so.