Simple and Honest Qst. on Trump's deportation scheme....

[Mertex]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

So, let's assume that you are right (which you aren't)....how the fuck is Donald Trump going to build the wall, then?

 

[BettyYeti]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

I see. You don't care what is actually true just what you think should be true? Wonderful, Peter Pan, but the rest of us live in the real world where nations, not the fucking Republic of Texas, set National Security Policy.
.

 

[BettyYeti]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

So, let's assume that you are right (which you aren't)....how the fuck is Donald Trump going to build the wall, then?

Trump can't do so, as Tex just stated, only the Republic of Texas can. Gee, what a shame, the Republic of New Mexico has decided to fuck that noise and let everyone in.

Poor Tex, screwed like a ten-dollar back-alley teenage whore by his own "logic". The Feds have no right to build his beloved wall.

 

[OKTexas]

Wow, please show how much was spent and on how many personnel. To my knowledge he appointed one to act as a liaison between the US military and the State.

Thank God for the backlash that he got....or who knows, he might have called in the Texas National Guard, too and wasted their services. The paranoid people that were wanting him to keep watch are probably the same people that support Trump.

After telling the State Guard to keep watch over Jade Helm, Abbott was pilloried in the media, by former state officials and by many of his own constituents. According to emails Gawker got through its own public information request, angry messages bombarded the governor’s office from all sides.
Texas Did the Bare Minimum to ‘Monitor’ Jade Helm – War Is Boring

So now you're admitting that saying he called up the National Guard and wasted all this money, was you just talking out of your ass?

He called the State Guard......but they ignored his ass because they knew it was just a bunch of paranoid people....you were probably one of them, sure that Obama was instigating a take over of your guns.......bwahaha.

Hell from your original post on the subject you wasn't even aware that it was a military exercise. You called it "that special work force". LMAO

I couldn't remember what the military exercise was....and I didn't feel like looking it up. Besides, I knew that you conservatives would know what I was talking about since most of you were probably part of the paranoia that was taking place.

So, what is your point? He could have spent a lot of money, if like the idiot he is, he would have listened to the paranoid idiots.

You keep making ridiculous assumptions and you keep failing. I was career military, I know how exercises work. You "could" have died yesterday but you didn't. Only idiots try to use "could haves", "might have" and such shit in a debate. I sure hope the hildabitch is as clueless as you next month.

My accusation that Abbot just wastes taxpayer money is not a fail. It is a fact that Abbott keeps coming up with frivolous shit to spend our tax payer money, while cutting out the beneficial things to help Texans. You worry so much about money being spent on illegals, when they actually benefit the country, but you sure look the other way when it comes to idiot Republican leaders wasting taxpayer money.

AUSTIN - Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has taken up his predecessor's crusade against the federal government, spending nearly a quarter of a million dollars suing the federal government in six new legal challenges since taking office in January.
Texas taxpayer tab for suing feds tops $5 million

The problem – and it has been this way for a long time — is with a governor and legislative majority that is intent on wrecking public education by under-funding public schools and wasting tax dollars and teachers’ valuable time on punitive, counter-productive standardized testing.
Greg Abbott | TSTA Blog Site

And, what does your military career have to do with the paranoia that caused Abbott to call upon the State Guard? My husband is career military too, and he didn't go apeshit thinking that Obama was going to initiate Martial Law....only idiots are that paranoid where everything scares them shitless went bonkers and demanded that Abbott do something.

Well you can hope in one hand and shit on the other and see which one fills up quicker. Hillary is a hell of a lot better qualified and fit to become our next President than Trump, so it appears the only ones that are clueless are you and the rest of the Trump supporters, who think all his promises are going to materialize.

Sorry child, what you call wasting taxpayer money, I call defending the sovereignty of the State and school funding has increased every year, just not fast enough to satisfy you regressives, tough shit.

Also maybe you should stop using your broad brush bullshit, insinuating every republican in TX went apeshit over jade helm. Most didn't have a clue that it ever occurred.

If you think the hildabitch is qualified for more than the president of the cell block, you might want to seek professional help. We also know Trump will have to work with congress, unless he uses your dear leaders unlawful EO tactics. He could get a lot done in the years it takes a case to wind through the courts.

 

[Mertex]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

 

[BettyYeti]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Nah, fuck that noise. Tex wants only Texans to ignore the property rights of other Texans. Those federal faggots doing such a thing would be wrong, even though it's perfectly legal and they have all over the nation not to mention, immigration is a Federal not a State issue. Tex has this all worked out, in his tiny mind.

 

[OKTexas]

Most, if not all the land has already been procured.

Not even close. And most of it you would have to take from the rightful owners against their wishes. And so goes property rights, Tex.

They would have to compensate the owners.....another bunch of money going toward a frivolous Republican/conservative idea.

The principle is what matters here. Property rights are sacred unless the Feds want your land? Yeah, there's a conservative idea for ya. Fucking fascists.

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

What? Are you serious? Where do you get such fantasies? The Constitution actually says this:

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


And besides, Trump is a great defender of eminent domain. Rand Paul pointed it out.

He did debut a new line of attack against the GOP frontrunner, real-estate mogul Donald Trump, citing a Supreme Court case, Kelo vs. City of New London, from 2005, involving the acquisition of private property using eminent domain. Paul said the case was "probably one of the most egregious Supreme Court cases of the last ten years or so."

At issue was whether New London had the right to take parcels of land from unwilling owners in the name of "public use" as defined under the Fifth Amendment. The court ruled in favor of the government, much to the chagrin of conservatives.

Paul said that Trump is in favor of the government's authority to acquire private land.
Rand Paul hits Donald Trump on eminent domain

Where does it say the property to be compensated is LAND?


Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--

Then you try to deflect to the States uses of eminent domain, which has nothing to do with the feds.

 

[OKTexas]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

 

[BettyYeti]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

Try this next time instead, Tex? Yeah, I was wrong. That's what real men say.

 

[OKTexas]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Nah, fuck that noise. Tex wants only Texans to ignore the property rights of other Texans. Those federal faggots doing such a thing would be wrong, even though it's perfectly legal and they have all over the nation not to mention, immigration is a Federal not a State issue. Tex has this all worked out, in his tiny mind.

I don't know what fagot little State you live in, but check and see who owns the rights of way for your interstate highways.

 

[OKTexas]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

Try this next time instead, Tex? Yeah, I was wrong. That's what real men say.

Fuck off and die fagot, I admitted my mistake.

 

[BettyYeti]

You might want to actually read the Constitution, the feds have no power of imminent domain within a State.

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Nah, fuck that noise. Tex wants only Texans to ignore the property rights of other Texans. Those federal faggots doing such a thing would be wrong, even though it's perfectly legal and they have all over the nation not to mention, immigration is a Federal not a State issue. Tex has this all worked out, in his tiny mind.

I don't know what fagot little State you live in, but check and see who owns the rights of way for your interstate highways.

There is no Interstate Highway System, bitch. You just said, it's not possible, it's unconstitutional.

Oh, and it just happens to exist and runs right through the fucking Republic of Texas. How do you think they got the land for that, in a poker game, dumbass?

 

[Mertex]

Thank God for the backlash that he got....or who knows, he might have called in the Texas National Guard, too and wasted their services. The paranoid people that were wanting him to keep watch are probably the same people that support Trump.

After telling the State Guard to keep watch over Jade Helm, Abbott was pilloried in the media, by former state officials and by many of his own constituents. According to emails Gawker got through its own public information request, angry messages bombarded the governor’s office from all sides.
Texas Did the Bare Minimum to ‘Monitor’ Jade Helm – War Is Boring

So now you're admitting that saying he called up the National Guard and wasted all this money, was you just talking out of your ass?

He called the State Guard......but they ignored his ass because they knew it was just a bunch of paranoid people....you were probably one of them, sure that Obama was instigating a take over of your guns.......bwahaha.

Hell from your original post on the subject you wasn't even aware that it was a military exercise. You called it "that special work force". LMAO

I couldn't remember what the military exercise was....and I didn't feel like looking it up. Besides, I knew that you conservatives would know what I was talking about since most of you were probably part of the paranoia that was taking place.

So, what is your point? He could have spent a lot of money, if like the idiot he is, he would have listened to the paranoid idiots.

You keep making ridiculous assumptions and you keep failing. I was career military, I know how exercises work. You "could" have died yesterday but you didn't. Only idiots try to use "could haves", "might have" and such shit in a debate. I sure hope the hildabitch is as clueless as you next month.

My accusation that Abbot just wastes taxpayer money is not a fail. It is a fact that Abbott keeps coming up with frivolous shit to spend our tax payer money, while cutting out the beneficial things to help Texans. You worry so much about money being spent on illegals, when they actually benefit the country, but you sure look the other way when it comes to idiot Republican leaders wasting taxpayer money.

AUSTIN - Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has taken up his predecessor's crusade against the federal government, spending nearly a quarter of a million dollars suing the federal government in six new legal challenges since taking office in January.
Texas taxpayer tab for suing feds tops $5 million

The problem – and it has been this way for a long time — is with a governor and legislative majority that is intent on wrecking public education by under-funding public schools and wasting tax dollars and teachers’ valuable time on punitive, counter-productive standardized testing.
Greg Abbott | TSTA Blog Site

And, what does your military career have to do with the paranoia that caused Abbott to call upon the State Guard? My husband is career military too, and he didn't go apeshit thinking that Obama was going to initiate Martial Law....only idiots are that paranoid where everything scares them shitless went bonkers and demanded that Abbott do something.

Well you can hope in one hand and shit on the other and see which one fills up quicker. Hillary is a hell of a lot better qualified and fit to become our next President than Trump, so it appears the only ones that are clueless are you and the rest of the Trump supporters, who think all his promises are going to materialize.

Sorry child, what you call wasting taxpayer money, I call defending the sovereignty of the State and school funding has increased every year, just not fast enough to satisfy you regressives, tough shit.

You don't mean defending the sovereignty, you mean turning Texas into a right-wing shithole? And no, Texas is way down the line in the country where education is concerned, thanks to the fucking right-wing that has taken over the state. Maybe it was fast enough for you regressive conservatives...that want to take the country back.....ward, but for anyone with a brain, it doesn't mean squat.


Overall, Texas scored a C- and on school finance, it earned a D.
Texas Ranked 43rd In Nation On 2016 Education Quality Report | Houston Public Media

Also maybe you should stop using your broad brush bullshit, insinuating every republican in TX went apeshit over jade helm. Most didn't have a clue that it ever occurred.

Well sure, those Texans that don't look to Breitbart of Faux News for their daily dose of politics, I'm sure there were not aware, but being that you're such a Trump fanatic, I lump you in with the rest of the uneducated, radical right-wing extremists who believe the conspiracy theories that the National Enquirer/Breitbart and even Faux News is famous for.

If you think the hildabitch is qualified for more than the president of the cell block, you might want to seek professional help. We also know Trump will have to work with congress, unless he uses your dear leaders unlawful EO tactics. He could get a lot done in the years it takes a case to wind through the courts.

Call her whatever you losers want....the orange orangutan doesn't know anything except to hurl insults at everyone that doesn't rah-rah him and she will decimate him on the first debate. And we all know that Bush and Reagan used more EO's than Obama, so enough of your lying bullshit.

 

[BettyYeti]

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

Try this next time instead, Tex? Yeah, I was wrong. That's what real men say.

Fuck off and die fagot, I admitted my mistake.

No, you acted like a dumped bitch when you could have just said yeah, I fucked up. I'm wrong, and how odd is this, the Federal Government actually does get to set Immigration Policy like the rest of the nations on earth. Well spank my ass and call me Judy!

 

[Mertex]

Wake the fuck up, Tex - History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

Try this next time instead, Tex? Yeah, I was wrong. That's what real men say.

Fuck off and die fagot, I admitted my mistake.

You also made a mistake in thinking that the Feds can't take property.....you seem to be making a lot of mistakes. You might as well secede....

Supreme Clause:
It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law.[2] In essence, it is a conflict-of-laws rule specifying that certain national acts take priority over any state acts that conflict with national law. In this respect, the Supremacy Clause follows the lead of Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation, which provided that "Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress Assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them."[3] A constitutional provision announcing the supremacy of federal law, the Supremacy Clause assumes the underlying priority of federal authority, at least when that authority is expressed in the Constitution itself.[4] No matter what the federal governmentor the states might wish to do, they have to stay within the boundaries of the Constitution. This makes the Supremacy Clause the cornerstone of the whole American political structure.[5][6]

 

[320 Years of History]

We know that not all these illegals are NOT Mexicans....So, do we ship them back to various countries in Central and South America? To the countries in the middle and far east? To various countries in Africa?

Do we just put them in boxcars, trucks and buses and drop everybody off in Tijuana?

Isn't the presumption that they'd be shipped back to the country of their citizenship? That's what I'd think would be done. I certainly hope nobody is thinking we'd just drop them off in Canada, Mexico or in the ocean beyond the U.S.' territorial waters.

 

[BettyYeti]

We know that not all these illegals are NOT Mexicans....So, do we ship them back to various countries in Central and South America? To the countries in the middle and far east? To various countries in Africa?

Do we just put them in boxcars, trucks and buses and drop everybody off in Tijuana?

Isn't the presumption that they'd be shipped back to the country of their citizenship? That's what I'd think would be done. I certainly hope nobody is thinking we'd just drop them off in Canada, Mexico or in the ocean beyond the U.S.' territorial waters.

It gets better. They want their kids to go as well, the ones who are American citizens.

I'm sure all the other nations of the world will be only too happy to have American citizens, no matter how large or small, just drop on in for life? Easy as pie. Everyone loves to have Americans just move right in and demand the right to become citizens, right?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yeah.....they only send 54 billion a year out of the country in remittance,which of course wouldn't have helped the US economy right?
As a reference thats the second largest income for mexico next to PEMEX.

54B in 16T is peanuts. Learn the math. 16,000 - 54? Peanuts.

There you go pulling shit out of your but again.

No. How big is the US economy? 16 trillion. How much is 54 billion from 16 trillion, which is 16,000 billion?

Well yeti...in Texas we get screwed because there is so much money being taken from local economies,and the same can be said with all border states.
But of course you dont give a shit about that.

You aren't losing money. Perry never cracked down on illegals there, he knows who does the real work and so do I. Without illegals Texas would have the economy of Mississippi. It's why Arizona made a stink and Texas pretended not to notice a thing. It can't afford to. You might not want them to live next door, or vote, but they are the only reason you have a new roof over your head. They knock that shit out under brutal conditions. The white guy sells the contract and the brown guys do the work. I know the system well. You can't have lived in Texas and not. It's how shit gets done there, Tex.

Ah...no. Texas has the economy it has due to oil and the tech industry.
And who exactly did those jobs before illegals?

 

[nat4900]

It gets better. They want their kids to go as well, the ones who are American citizens.

I'm sure all the other nations of the world will be only too happy to have American citizens, no matter how large or small, just drop on in for life? Easy as pie. Everyone loves to have Americans just move right in and demand the right to become citizens, right?

I'd guess that under a Trump [neo-fascist] administration, birth certificates for these "anchor" kids would be revoked and voided.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't care what the feds have done with the complicity of the federal courts, read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and see what land the congress has legislative authority over, how that land must be obtained and for what purposes that land can be used.

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 deals with a militia.....has nothing to do with eminent domain. So, just like the Texas Constitution says, adequate compensation and an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law, which I'm sure the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Feds. You Fail.



Even the Texas Constitution states:

Sec. 17. TAKING, DAMAGING, OR DESTROYING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; CONTROL OF PRIVILEGES AND FRANCHISES. (a) No person's property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made, unless by the consent of such person, and only if the taking, damage, or destruction is for:

(1) the ownership, use, and enjoyment of the property, notwithstanding an incidental use, by:

(A) the State, a political subdivision of the State, or the public at large; or

(B) an entity granted the power of eminent domain under law; or

(2) the elimination of urban blight on a particular parcel of property.
THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

Yeah I miscounted, should have said clause 17. Sue me.

Try this next time instead, Tex? Yeah, I was wrong. That's what real men say.

Fuck off and die fagot, I admitted my mistake.

You also made a mistake in thinking that the Feds can't take property.....you seem to be making a lot of mistakes. You might as well secede....

Supreme Clause:
It provides that state courts are bound by the supreme law; in case of conflict between federal and state law, the federal law must be applied. Even state constitutions are subordinate to federal law.[2] In essence, it is a conflict-of-laws rule specifying that certain national acts take priority over any state acts that conflict with national law. In this respect, the Supremacy Clause follows the lead of Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation, which provided that "Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress Assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them."[3] A constitutional provision announcing the supremacy of federal law, the Supremacy Clause assumes the underlying priority of federal authority, at least when that authority is expressed in the Constitution itself.[4] No matter what the federal governmentor the states might wish to do, they have to stay within the boundaries of the Constitution. This makes the Supremacy Clause the cornerstone of the whole American political structure.[5][6]

I made no mistake on that, I quoted the Constitution itself, you know, the supreme law of the land. What is it that you failed to understand that the feds can't take land within a State without the consent of the State legislature? The supremacy clause only applies to powers actually granted the feds by the Constitution, not whatever the hell the feds might want to do.