Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
If states can willingly ignore them via sanctuary policies, why can't they also enforce them?States can NOT enforce immigration laws. Only the Federal government can.
No.That depends on who's doing the investigation. This particular investigation is looking like the Soviet tactic of "Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime."What is the end goal of investigating any crime?What is the end goal of all this? Is it to incarcerate Trump, to empty his bank accounts with endless litigation, or both?
Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.Everyone.Does that only apply to Trump, or should it apply to various corporations as well?uh the end goal is for him to pay taxes like you and me.What is the end goal of all this? Is it to incarcerate Trump, to empty his bank accounts with endless litigation, or both?
Are you saying the Dem DA in NY, avoided prosecuting Trump because of his wealth? Obama too I guess....wow....Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.Everyone.Does that only apply to Trump, or should it apply to various corporations as well?uh the end goal is for him to pay taxes like you and me.What is the end goal of all this? Is it to incarcerate Trump, to empty his bank accounts with endless litigation, or both?
What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?If states can willingly ignore them via sanctuary policies, why can't they also enforce them?States can NOT enforce immigration laws. Only the Federal government can.
States can not. States can not enforce immigration laws nor can they stop the federal government from doing so.
Sanctuary as far as governments go is just political mumbo jumbo. A church might be legitimate.
The Clintons and Biden should be up for investigation next then.Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.
What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?If states can willingly ignore them via sanctuary policies, why can't they also enforce them?States can NOT enforce immigration laws. Only the Federal government can.
States can not. States can not enforce immigration laws nor can they stop the federal government from doing so.
Sanctuary as far as governments go is just political mumbo jumbo. A church might be legitimate.
Fair enough. Reimbursement should be part of the equation. Still, most of the arguments I've heard from the left in support of sanctuary policies haven't mentioned funding. They've talked about some supposed increase in willingness among illegal communities to inform police of problems. They don't typically provide evidence for this argument, but that's what they usually go with.What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?
They used to. The Feds refused to reimburse them so they said screw off. One might ask what good is immigration laws when the Fed does not enforce them. Sorry, it has to start there.
Fair enough. Reimbursement should be part of the equation. Still, most of the arguments I've heard from the left in support of sanctuary policies haven't mentioned funding. They've talked about some supposed increase in willingness among illegal communities to inform police of problems. They don't typically provide evidence for this argument, but that's what they usually go with.What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?
They used to. The Feds refused to reimburse them so they said screw off. One might ask what good is immigration laws when the Fed does not enforce them. Sorry, it has to start there.
Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.Fair enough. Reimbursement should be part of the equation. Still, most of the arguments I've heard from the left in support of sanctuary policies haven't mentioned funding. They've talked about some supposed increase in willingness among illegal communities to inform police of problems. They don't typically provide evidence for this argument, but that's what they usually go with.What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?
They used to. The Feds refused to reimburse them so they said screw off. One might ask what good is immigration laws when the Fed does not enforce them. Sorry, it has to start there.
All the same as long as we are going to allow businesses to skate free, I support allowing all to do so.
Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.Fair enough. Reimbursement should be part of the equation. Still, most of the arguments I've heard from the left in support of sanctuary policies haven't mentioned funding. They've talked about some supposed increase in willingness among illegal communities to inform police of problems. They don't typically provide evidence for this argument, but that's what they usually go with.What's the point of having immigration laws if local authorities don't cooperate with feds on them?
They used to. The Feds refused to reimburse them so they said screw off. One might ask what good is immigration laws when the Fed does not enforce them. Sorry, it has to start there.
All the same as long as we are going to allow businesses to skate free, I support allowing all to do so.
Lol, next? Don't you mean again?The Clintons and Biden should be up for investigation next then.Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.
I'd only be good with that if we shrank the government down to 1 quarter of its current size first.Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.
I'm good with that.
And how many investigations have we done with Trump now?Lol, next? Don't you mean again?The Clintons and Biden should be up for investigation next then.Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.
I'd only be good with that if we shrank the government down to 1 quarter of its current size first.Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.
I'm good with that.
I agree, and that will be when the collapse happens.I'd only be good with that if we shrank the government down to 1 quarter of its current size first.Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.
I'm good with that.
That isn't going to happen. Mass amnesty in some form most likely will.
We're still doing he first ones. He used his office to styme investigations and prosecutors. Can't do that any more so they are finally proceeding.And how many investigations have we done with Trump now?Lol, next? Don't you mean again?The Clintons and Biden should be up for investigation next then.Your damn right it should be. tRump avoided prosecution for decades by being wealthy. No more.Then the law should be applied evenly. It isn't.
I agree, and that will be when the collapse happens.I'd only be good with that if we shrank the government down to 1 quarter of its current size first.Well, we might as well go with mass amnesty then.
I'm good with that.
That isn't going to happen. Mass amnesty in some form most likely will.
Why not just take the shortcut and execute him? It would be more honest in terms of intentions.We're still doing he first ones. He used his office to styme investigations and prosecutors. Can't do that any more so they are finally proceeding.And how many investigations have we done with Trump now?
I'm halfway good with that, although I'd prefer to have an exit strategy for living in another country before that happens.I agree, and that will be when the collapse happens.
I'm good with that.
