I have never seen so many ignorant people about immigration in my life

[saveliberty]

Lol! I knew you'd fall into your next trap that you set for yourself. Read the definition of "persecution" again. And what are those being persecuted for? Because they are in a social group unfitting for gangs and cartels. These who are persecuted are in a "social group". Just not the right group for the gangs.

You need a link for that lying answer.

What lying answer? I gave you the definition for persecution with a link. And you gave us the explanation for asylum seeker. And? A link for what?

No, you used my link incorrectly.

 

[WTP]

"The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes - such as domestic violence or gang violence - or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim."

Domestic abuse no grounds for US asylum

Well then, you just contradicted yourself with your own link. "Persecution" applies for asylum as well as "social class". Both of these were part of your link. Now you tell us a different story . Lol! You can't have it both ways hot shot.

 

[WTP]

Lol! I knew you'd fall into your next trap that you set for yourself. Read the definition of "persecution" again. And what are those being persecuted for? Because they are in a social group unfitting for gangs and cartels. These who are persecuted are in a "social group". Just not the right group for the gangs.

You need a link for that lying answer.

What lying answer? I gave you the definition for persecution with a link. And you gave us the explanation for asylum seeker. And? A link for what?

No, you used my link incorrectly.

Show us.

 

[saveliberty]

By the way, we have gangs here too, so how could that possibly work in a thinking persons head?

 

[saveliberty]

"The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes - such as domestic violence or gang violence - or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim."

Domestic abuse no grounds for US asylum

Well then, you just contradicted yourself with your own link. "Persecution" applies for asylum as well as "social class". Both of these were part of your link. Now you tell us a different story . Lol! You can't have it both ways hot shot.

I quoted the US Attorney General from June idiot. It invalidates your argument completely, just admit defeat.

 

[saveliberty]

Waiting for a source backed statement WTP....otherwise I claim total victory.

 

[WTP]

Lol! I knew you'd fall into your next trap that you set for yourself. Read the definition of "persecution" again. And what are those being persecuted for? Because they are in a social group unfitting for gangs and cartels. These who are persecuted are in a "social group". Just not the right group for the gangs.

You need a link for that lying answer.

What lying answer? I gave you the definition for persecution with a link. And you gave us the explanation for asylum seeker. And? A link for what?

Still waiting?

Try post #57

I did. And you want it both ways. You got caught linking something absolute, only to change it for your convenience. The truth is, these asylum seekers are interviewed on a case by case basis. Not all apply, that is for sure. But if the asylum clause you linked applies to those truly affected, then the "persecution" and or "social status" will give them asylum.

 

[Meathead]

And they're all Trump supporters.

They don't even know what "seeking asylum" means. They think it is some sort of illegal act.

The Republican leadership has done a fantastic job of keeping their base so misinformed, that they could easily tell them to follow Trump off a cliff, and they would certainly do it.

I was in total shock when I watched that video. The alarming gross stupidity was off the chain.

Folks, this country is in trouble.

I've never seen so many ignorant illegals, so there.

 

[saveliberty]

I did. And you want it both ways. You got caught linking something absolute, only to change it for your convenience. The truth is, these asylum seekers are interviewed on a case by case basis. Not all apply, that is for sure. But if the asylum clause you linked applies to those truly affected, then the "persecution" and or "social status" will give them asylum.

No you didn't liar. I proved gangs and cartels are not grounds for asylum, that is what the vast majority of these illegals are claiming. You incorrectly tried to use social status to grant asylum for those situations. You need a proven source or admit defeat.

 

[WTP]

"The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes - such as domestic violence or gang violence - or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim."

Domestic abuse no grounds for US asylum

Well then, you just contradicted yourself with your own link. "Persecution" applies for asylum as well as "social class". Both of these were part of your link. Now you tell us a different story . Lol! You can't have it both ways hot shot.

I quoted the US Attorney General from June idiot. It invalidates your argument completely, just admit defeat.

The attorney Generals quote tells us he does not know the law. Nor is there a law stating such. That is a policy contrary to the "asylum" law. The AG adopted a policy that skirts the law.

 

[WTP]

And they're all Trump supporters.

They don't even know what "seeking asylum" means. They think it is some sort of illegal act.

The Republican leadership has done a fantastic job of keeping their base so misinformed, that they could easily tell them to follow Trump off a cliff, and they would certainly do it.

I was in total shock when I watched that video. The alarming gross stupidity was off the chain.

Folks, this country is in trouble.

I've never seen so many ignorant illegals, so there.

STUPID POST!

 

[saveliberty]

Nice fall back position with the case by case meme.

 

[saveliberty]

The attorney Generals quote tells us he does not know the law. Nor is there a law stating such. That is a policy contrary to the "asylum" law. The AG adopted a policy that skirts the law.

He's the US Attorney General moron. Feel free to cite a credible source.

 

[saveliberty]

BTW, we don't have to let them run around until they get a hearing either.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that immigrants, even those with permanent legal status and asylum seekers, do not have the right to periodic bond hearings.

Supreme Court Ruling Means Immigrants Could Continue To Be Detained Indefinitely

 

[WTP]

I did. And you want it both ways. You got caught linking something absolute, only to change it for your convenience. The truth is, these asylum seekers are interviewed on a case by case basis. Not all apply, that is for sure. But if the asylum clause you linked applies to those truly affected, then the "persecution" and or "social status" will give them asylum.

No you didn't liar. I proved gangs and cartels are not grounds for asylum, that is what the vast majority of these illegals are claiming.

Again, you are falling down on the job. Asylum seekers are not illegal. And, your definition of asylum seekers explains clearly, through "persecution" and "social class" that law clearly applies to asylum seekers who again, are not illegal.

You incorrectly tried to use social status to grant asylum for those situations. You need a proven source or admit defeat.

There is no precedence to admit defeat for anything. The law for asylum seekers is clear . As you and I pointed out. An AG's policy change is invalid. He know's that, you know that, and so does law enforcement. Social class and persecution apply via the law. The AG can play games with the law all he wants. But, at the end of the day, the law still applies. You are the one who has been defeated here. And you did it with your own link.

 

[WTP]

I did. And you want it both ways. You got caught linking something absolute, only to change it for your convenience. The truth is, these asylum seekers are interviewed on a case by case basis. Not all apply, that is for sure. But if the asylum clause you linked applies to those truly affected, then the "persecution" and or "social status" will give them asylum.

No you didn't liar. I proved gangs and cartels are not grounds for asylum, that is what the vast majority of these illegals are claiming.

Again, you are falling down on the job. Asylum seekers are not illegal. And, your definition of asylum seekers explains clearly, through "persecution" and "social class" that law clearly applies to asylum seekers who again, are not illegal.

You incorrectly tried to use social status to grant asylum for those situations. You need a proven source or admit defeat.

There is no precedence to admit defeat for anything. The law for asylum seekers is clear . As you and I pointed it out. An AG's policy change is invalid. He know's that, you know that, and so does law enforcement. Social class and persecution apply via the law. The AG can play games with the law all he wants. But, at the end of the day, the law still applies. You are the one who has been defeated here. And you did it with your own link.

 

[WTP]

Well moron, we have a legal process to become an immigrant in the US, the illegals did not follow those laws.

An asylum seeker is not illegal. Again, explain how asylum seekers are illegal?

They do not present to a legal check in point, they sneak illegally into the country. Libtard!

Which would be why so many of them die in the desert trying to sneak in.

If they come to the border to turn themselves in, they are asylum seekers. Those folks aren't sneaking in, and are not illegal. Do you not know the difference?

They just cannot cross the border anywhere! They have to go to a border crossing checkpoint or to an embassy! Are ewe educated now?

Did I say they could?

 

[saveliberty]

I did. And you want it both ways. You got caught linking something absolute, only to change it for your convenience. The truth is, these asylum seekers are interviewed on a case by case basis. Not all apply, that is for sure. But if the asylum clause you linked applies to those truly affected, then the "persecution" and or "social status" will give them asylum.

No you didn't liar. I proved gangs and cartels are not grounds for asylum, that is what the vast majority of these illegals are claiming.

Again, you are falling down on the job. Asylum seekers are not illegal. And, your definition of asylum seekers explains clearly, through "persecution" and "social class" that law clearly applies to asylum seekers who again, are not illegal.

You incorrectly tried to use social status to grant asylum for those situations. You need a proven source or admit defeat.

There is no precedence to admit defeat for anything. The law for asylum seekers is clear . As you and I pointed out. An AG's policy change is invalid. He know's that, you know that, and so does law enforcement. Social class and persecution apply via the law. The AG can play games with the law all he wants. But, at the end of the day, the law still applies. You are the one who has been defeated here. And you did it with your own link.

Just because you call them asylum seekers does not make it true. They are applying for that status based on fleeing from gangs or cartels. That is not a basis for getting asylum according to Jeff Sessions. You have not proven Sessions to be in error other than stating and restating it. If you could have done that, we would not be at this point in the discussion, you lose.

 

[WTP]

The attorney Generals quote tells us he does not know the law. Nor is there a law stating such. That is a policy contrary to the "asylum" law. The AG adopted a policy that skirts the law.

He's the US Attorney General moron. Feel free to cite a credible source.

The change in policy by the AG speaks for itself, which is contrary to the law. The credible source is you. You linked it right? Lol!

 

[Frankeneinstein]

You're right, I don't. With your incoherent, grammatically incorrect, run on sentence structure, I'm convinced I saw you in the crowd as well. Go back to school and learn basic grammar. Because, no one is ever going to know what you are talking about if you don't.

So far your biggest complaint seems to be your lack of comprehension...I'll bet you've heard that enough times to understand it.