*trump2028!! wrote:
In case you were wondering why Democrats fight so hard for criminal illegal immigrants:
An Illegal alien arrested by ICE was registered as an active Democrat voter in Maryland.
Oh, he is a Maryland man!
-
01
-
Noyankee wrote:
Everybody\'s got n opinion wrote:
That's the strategy. New lunacy every day. It's accelerating because he doesn't want to leave any room for the minions to remember the Epstein files problem.
then you maniacs will start spewing hate online and then start coordinating plots to kill those who speak, and then get arrested. thrown in prison and you can make new friends doggy style.
That's kind of weird, dude. I can't really explain why, but trust me, that's weirdo stuff you posted. A certain weirdo emphasis and zeal. Normal people see you post that and they kind of like quietly think to themselves "Jesus Christ, WTF is wrong with this guy?"
Trump was a confidential informant for the FBI. Source: Johnsons. Trump worked the case. He had immunity. We need to see his agreements with the FBI, his notes, his handler's notes, interviews, and correspondence.
Source: Johnsons. We have sourced these facts to Johnsons.
40 -
JustMe22 wrote:
BillionairesForHire wrote:
Republicans have long argued against a tyrannical government. Now they are arguing for a government that does not need warrants for arrests, it can be done without allowing the courts to decide innocence or guilt, and it is fine for a secret police force in masks and armor to do this, and the public should not be allowed to see where they are taking the people.
Ice does not need warrants for their arrests, as they are law enforcement and law enforcement does not need a judge to grant them authority to make an arrest. All they need is reasonable suspicion that a crime has taken place, or is about to take place.
It is genrally understood (but not settled in a firm, clear answer in a court of law) that ICE does need a *judicial* warrant to enter private property without the owner's consent to investigate a crime. That is because the Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizure, and Fourth Amendment protections could possibly extend to anyone in this country, whether they are here legally or not. This link delves into the matter, but doesn't address the Fourth Amendment:
The situation becomes much muskier when you consider ICE's stance on deportations: it is a civil matter, and not a criminal one. That means certain rights, like the right to privacy and the right to counsel (legal representation) do not apply.
Here is ICE's answer to the question, "Do we need a warrant?" (Phrased broadly, snwered in their favor--that is, "no"--and without regard to possible constitutional protections, first question on the list):
Here is another take, from a more neutral party, that delineates the difference between administrative warrants and judicial warrants:
An administrative warrant (issued by ICE, naming the person suspected of being in this country without proper documentation), as it is generally understood, *does not* allow ICE to enter private property without a judge's signed order, commonly called a judicial warrant.
I'm not a lawyer, so please don't construe this as legal advice. I just noticed that you claimed ICE does not need warrants. They don't in some cases. In other cases, the courts need to be involved to settle the matter.
That was a very long post to say "sometimes warrants are not required". What about arrests for being brown (most of what ICE is doing now)? What about armor, masks, and no way to identify the officer or what police force they are? What about lack of access to courts? What about the inhumane conditions in US holding facilities. What about deportations to places intentionally chosen to be brutal without possibility of release?
50 -
Shoko Asahara wrote:
Today's ADP Employment Report -- Private Payrolls (month to month)
- Last month: -3,000
- Forecast: +45,000
- Actual: -32,000
More evidence that the Trump economy is an absolute dumpster fire.
Time to fire ADP!
80 -
Shoko Asahara wrote:
Today's ADP Employment Report -- Private Payrolls (month to month)
- Last month: -3,000
- Forecast: +45,000
- Actual: -32,000
More evidence that the Trump economy is an absolute dumpster fire.
Terrible
20 -
living doc wrote:
Raptured. wrote:
And, Trump is paying farmers to grow crops that will be destroyed rather than given away so that rich supermarket owners don't have to reduce the price of food.
Have you ever operated a market?
Have you?
50 -
living doc wrote:
Raptured. wrote:
And, Trump is paying farmers to grow crops that will be destroyed rather than given away so that rich supermarket owners don't have to reduce the price of food.
Have you ever operated a market?
Who did? Piggly Wiggly?
Mormons are not Christians. The MAGA attack on the Mormon temple was NOT an attack on Christianity. It was an attack on Mormanity.
Source: Bible.
40 -
El Runkin wrote:
Rea1 0bvi wrote:
"Fox News contributor and conservative legal commentator Andy McCarthy argued that the Trump Justice Department’s indictment of former FBI Director James Comey is 'factually without foundation' and 'should be dismissed' in a new column for National Review.
...'The indictment is inadequately pled and factually without foundation. It should be dismissed,' he added."
Sounds like a solid case brought by a competent department.
That's consistent with discussions of the Comey Indictment here. If that bare-bones deficient pleading isn't re-drafted to fix the erroneous premise (Comey never said the quoted words), include some actual factual support for the allegations, and comply with various basis procedural rules for basic pleadings, it is going to be dismissed. And the prosecution will have to get a real lawyer to do that, because Hallarans obviously doesn't understand what a criminal Indictment is.
One thing in McCarthy's analysis that I wasn't aware of was his suggestion that the prosecution is somehow saying (where?) that Cruz's question was about someone other than McCabe. That's even worse. I don't know how anyone could read that deficient Indictment to be about anyone other than McCabe. It was difficult enough to even figure that part out. If it's about someone else, I would hope the judge wouldn't even let the prosecution try to re-draft and file it. You could get one of the Tylenol autisticals that post in this thread to do a better job than Hallarans.
Indeed.
To me, McCarthy's analysis sounded an awful lot like yours on this thread. Made me wonder if McCarthy might be you in disguise. Or perhaps he just reads this thread to get his ideas.
Developing
20 -
BillionairesForHire wrote:
JustMe22 wrote:
Ice does not need warrants for their arrests, as they are law enforcement and law enforcement does not need a judge to grant them authority to make an arrest. All they need is reasonable suspicion that a crime has taken place, or is about to take place.
It is genrally understood (but not settled in a firm, clear answer in a court of law) that ICE does need a *judicial* warrant to enter private property without the owner's consent to investigate a crime. That is because the Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable search and seizure, and Fourth Amendment protections could possibly extend to anyone in this country, whether they are here legally or not. This link delves into the matter, but doesn't address the Fourth Amendment:
The situation becomes much muskier when you consider ICE's stance on deportations: it is a civil matter, and not a criminal one. That means certain rights, like the right to privacy and the right to counsel (legal representation) do not apply.
Here is ICE's answer to the question, "Do we need a warrant?" (Phrased broadly, snwered in their favor--that is, "no"--and without regard to possible constitutional protections, first question on the list):
Here is another take, from a more neutral party, that delineates the difference between administrative warrants and judicial warrants:
An administrative warrant (issued by ICE, naming the person suspected of being in this country without proper documentation), as it is generally understood, *does not* allow ICE to enter private property without a judge's signed order, commonly called a judicial warrant.
I'm not a lawyer, so please don't construe this as legal advice. I just noticed that you claimed ICE does not need warrants. They don't in some cases. In other cases, the courts need to be involved to settle the matter.
That was a very long post to say "sometimes warrants are not required". What about arrests for being brown (most of what ICE is doing now)? What about armor, masks, and no way to identify the officer or what police force they are? What about lack of access to courts? What about the inhumane conditions in US holding facilities. What about deportations to places intentionally chosen to be brutal without possibility of release?
I saw a woman at the coffee shop wearing an ICE type uniform without the ID on it (ICE, POLICE, FBI, BORDER PATROL, etc.). She was picking up some 10 boxes carrying 2-dozen donuts each, and over 30 full breakfasts to go. I said, "Looks like a nice breakfast party." She replied, "This is my assignment. Full breakfasts for the big guys, and donuts for everyone. We are all out in the field today."
She got into her van, and it had the license plates covered with taped on paper. As she drove off the paper flapped up and you could see the license number. She was definitely part of Trump's goon squad. Girls provide food for the boys.
My neighbor was highway patrol officer of over 40 years. I mentioned the woman to him and he said that there was no way she was with any law enforcement. No one was assigned a mass breakfast catering job. Two dozen donuts and some pots of coffee was the limit any officer would be asked to bring in.
30 -
AIIigator AIcatraz wrote:
Privatize TSA, Air Traffic, FAA: we have seen what happens when govt services are privatized. Price goes up, quality goes down. Critical citizen safety across entire industries should never be entrusted to a for profit company. They do not answer to the people.
IRS: Without it, where does the govt collect revenue? This is a billionaires wet dream and the dolts have latched on. Newsflash, it won't be abolished, it will just stop collecting from rich people. Your taxes will either stay the same or go up to fill the gap.
Who defines non-essential? All govt workers have a job because at some point it was deemed necessary and Congress approved the budget.
41 -
just pretend wrote:
Shoko Asahara wrote:
Today's ADP Employment Report -- Private Payrolls (month to month)
- Last month: -3,000
- Forecast: +45,000
- Actual: -32,000
More evidence that the Trump economy is an absolute dumpster fire.
Terrible
Next Month: +750,000 federal works unemployed by Trump, and sent to look for work in a collapsing job market. Trumpism at it's peak before bankruptcy ... drunken sailor syndrome.
Drunken Sailor Syndrome: Also known as truncal ataxia. A condition characterized by a wide-based gait and instability, resembling the unsteady movements of a drunken sailor. It is often caused by damage to the cerebellum and can result from various factors, including alcohol intoxication and certain neurological disorders.
40 -
Rea1 0bvi wrote:
El Runkin wrote:
That's consistent with discussions of the Comey Indictment here. If that bare-bones deficient pleading isn't re-drafted to fix the erroneous premise (Comey never said the quoted words), include some actual factual support for the allegations, and comply with various basis procedural rules for basic pleadings, it is going to be dismissed. And the prosecution will have to get a real lawyer to do that, because Hallarans obviously doesn't understand what a criminal Indictment is.
One thing in McCarthy's analysis that I wasn't aware of was his suggestion that the prosecution is somehow saying (where?) that Cruz's question was about someone other than McCabe. That's even worse. I don't know how anyone could read that deficient Indictment to be about anyone other than McCabe. It was difficult enough to even figure that part out. If it's about someone else, I would hope the judge wouldn't even let the prosecution try to re-draft and file it. You could get one of the Tylenol autisticals that post in this thread to do a better job than Hallarans.
Indeed.
To me, McCarthy's analysis sounded an awful lot like yours on this thread. Made me wonder if McCarthy might be you in disguise. Or perhaps he just reads this thread to get his ideas.
Developing
Give podcast Main Justice a listen. They confirm that it wasn’t McCabe. Instead it was a conversation with another Comey associate.
But they do share all the awfulness of this joke of an indictment. It’s right at the start of the pod.
00 -
AIIigator AIcatraz wrote:
Oldrunningguy wrote:
Hey Trumpers,
Did you see that Trump just signed a NATO like security guarantee for Qater?
Essentially just like NATO, Trump will view any attacks on Qater to be an attack on the US. We will respond with military action.
Don't recall hearing Trump talk about this on the campaign trail. You think it might have something to do with Qater dumping billions into the Trump family lately?
Qatar is a stable and friendly country in the Middle East and contributes greatly to world peace. We should further improve bilateral relations with them.
A country that’s a big financial supporter of Hamas
20 -
El Runkin wrote:
Noyankee wrote:
then you maniacs will start spewing hate online and then start coordinating plots to kill those who speak, and then get arrested. thrown in prison and you can make new friends doggy style.
That's kind of weird, dude. I can't really explain why, but trust me, that's weirdo stuff you posted. A certain weirdo emphasis and zeal. Normal people see you post that and they kind of like quietly think to themselves "Jesus Christ, WTF is wrong with this guy?"
Trump was a confidential informant for the FBI. Source: Johnsons. Trump worked the case. He had immunity. We need to see his agreements with the FBI, his notes, his handler's notes, interviews, and correspondence.
Source: Johnsons. We have sourced these facts to Johnsons.
No normal people here
02 -
BillionairesForHire wrote:
JustMe22 wrote:
[Explains the law poorly]
That was a very long post to say "sometimes warrants are not required". What about arrests for being brown (most of what ICE is doing now)? What about armor, masks, and no way to identify the officer or what police force they are? What about lack of access to courts? What about the inhumane conditions in US holding facilities. What about deportations to places intentionally chosen to be brutal without possibility of release?
Arrests for "being brown" is a subjective standard, loaded with political implications, and not the legal standard being used. The legal standard is "reasonable suspicion." Reasonable suspicion is also subjective, overly broad, but *not* political. You can disagree with it all you want (it has it's limitations), but it is there for a reason: without it, law enforcement would need *definitive proof* in each and every case. A closer standard appears in court system (where it's actually "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."). In layman's terms, if the police needed definitive proof before making an arrest, they wouldn't be able to arrest anyone, and many guilty people would not face justice.
Armor and masks are in place to protect the agents as they perform their duty. In a perfect world, people would not hurl rocks at ICE agents, or track down and harass their family members because of their loved one's employment. In this world, they do.
Lack of access to courts is a real concern. ICE's position when due process is denied is that they are enforcing civil statute, not criminal statute. That needs to be addressed in the court system.
"Inhumane" conditions is also a matter of subjectivity. Most people do not care about how detainees are treated. It does speak to our national character. I am not aware of anyone who has died in ICE custody due to neglect. There *are* reports of people dying in detention:
This raises the question of neglect, but doesn't answer it. Our political motivations are best set aside when we look at these cases.
Deportations to places considered brutal? The administration's position is that these are hardened criminals who are not our responsibility once they are outside US borders. I think you can have sympathy for them, even if that's true, but what exactly are you proposing here?
12 -
El Runkin wrote:
Noyankee wrote:
then you maniacs will start spewing hate online and then start coordinating plots to kill those who speak, and then get arrested. thrown in prison and you can make new friends doggy style.
That's kind of weird, dude. I can't really explain why, but trust me, that's weirdo stuff you posted. A certain weirdo emphasis and zeal. Normal people see you post that and they kind of like quietly think to themselves "Jesus Christ, WTF is wrong with this guy?"
Trump was a confidential informant for the FBI. Source: Johnsons. Trump worked the case. He had immunity. We need to see his agreements with the FBI, his notes, his handler's notes, interviews, and correspondence.
Source: Johnsons. We have sourced these facts to Johnsons.
WTF is wrong with this guy, indeed. In one run on sentence he spouts a conspiracy theory that all democrats spew hate and are plotting to kill people for free speech. He conveniently ignores the daily lies and hate spewed by his orange messiah. Then, based on that lunacy, says democrats should be arrested, jailed and sexually assaulted. He seems to believe that is a reasonable take and repeats it daily.
00 -
12
-
The Governor of Oregon must be living in a “Dream World.” Portland is a NEVER-ENDING DISASTER. Many people have been badly hurt, and even killed. It is run like a Third World Country. We’re only going in because, as American Patriots, WE HAVE NO CHOICE. LAW AND ORDER MUST PREVAIL IN OUR CITIES, AND EVERYWHERE ELSE!
14 -
Jeffries should just resign. No way he recovers from the Trump Mariachi Band Meme.
😂😂😂
11 -
Raptured. wrote:
BillionairesForHire wrote:
That was a very long post to say "sometimes warrants are not required". What about arrests for being brown (most of what ICE is doing now)? What about armor, masks, and no way to identify the officer or what police force they are? What about lack of access to courts? What about the inhumane conditions in US holding facilities. What about deportations to places intentionally chosen to be brutal without possibility of release?
I saw a woman at the coffee shop wearing an ICE type uniform without the ID on it (ICE, POLICE, FBI, BORDER PATROL, etc.). She was picking up some 10 boxes carrying 2-dozen donuts each, and over 30 full breakfasts to go. I said, "Looks like a nice breakfast party." She replied, "This is my assignment. Full breakfasts for the big guys, and donuts for everyone. We are all out in the field today."
She got into her van, and it had the license plates covered with taped on paper. As she drove off the paper flapped up and you could see the license number. She was definitely part of Trump's goon squad. Girls provide food for the boys.
My neighbor was highway patrol officer of over 40 years. I mentioned the woman to him and he said that there was no way she was with any law enforcement. No one was assigned a mass breakfast catering job. Two dozen donuts and some pots of coffee was the limit any officer would be asked to bring in.
Well, allow me to rub it in: your tax dollars at work! At least we know ICE is an equal opportunity employer, even if they might have a problem with sexism in job assignments. But...donuts for breakfast? Wait, there's actually nothing wrong with that. At least you don't have to worry about ICE knocking on your door because you called them a "goon" squad. I suspect that they are just regular people like you and me, with better pay, better employment prospects, and...well, better everything. At the cost of being hated by half the country. Kind of a devil's bargain, on a fundamental level. Doesn't make them the devil, though.
00
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.