Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

It’s a better use of time to call a retard a retard instead of explaining in vain all the whys/hows of the retardation in said retard’s posts.

---

You used to have some intelligent insights, but now seem to have suffered some sort of debilitating injury that has reduced your intellectual capacity to that of an dementia sufferer. My apologies for the stroke or other traumatic injury.

So now that we know Title 42 is unenforceable by court order, and existing Title 8 describes in detail our nations immigration and enforcement laws, what precisely do you have against President Biden enforcing federal law again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You used to have some intelligent insights, but now seem to have suffered some sort of debilitating injury that has reduced your intellectual capacity to that of an dementia sufferer. My apologies for the stroke or other traumatic injury.

So now that we know Title 42 is unenforceable by court order, and existing Title 8 describes in detail our nations immigration and enforcement laws, what precisely do you have against President Biden enforcing federal law again?

---

A brief timeline of events:

Day 1 of Biden in office he rescinded Trump’s EO relating to border security.

Immediately after, we began seeing through data a sharp increase in the number of migrants illegally crossing our southern border.

Republicans and some in media began to question Biden’s policies. The Biden administration repeatedly told the public that our borders are secure and there is no problem despite contradictory evidence.

Immigration and border security was not a priority for the Biden administration. We know this because see above and the Dems did nothing about it for 2 years that they controlled Congress.

Next, the problem continues to the point that so-called Democrat stronghold sanctuary cities begin to complain that they are spending all of their money & resources on illegal migrants. At this point it begins to become a voter issue not just for Republicans but sane Democrats as well.

3 years into Biden’s presidency Congress puts together a so-called bipartisan senate bill that really does nothing to address the root problem and actually makes illegal immigration’s lawful/acceptable up to a certain number.

House Republicans who now have the majority reject the bill. Biden complains that it’s Republicans fault our border is not secure and that his hands are tied.

Biden now, at the 11th hour just before an election, introduces a new EO to shut down asylum seekers at port of entry under some circumstances.

—

Anybody except the most extreme of retards understand that the Biden administration caused this problem, and is only now making a half-hearted attempt to do something about it just before the election. Unfortunately it is too little too late.

Senate Republicans were the death of the bill when they announced their own bipartisan immigration reform bill would face an insurmountable fillibuster threat. Republicans do not have the majority in the Senate.

One of the legislative agreements reached in the proposed bill was that the grant the Department of Homeland Security the ability to shut down the border of asylum requests met a specific daily threshold. Unless you were asleep, this is exactly what Biden was forced to pursue by executive order as Congress failed to do it's job.

Again, you seem to be awfully upset that Biden is enforcing the law that despite your protests you undoubtedly agree with. Thanking Biden for cutting through the partisan deadlock ought to have been your response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Senate Republicans were the death of the bill when they announced their own bipartisan immigration reform bill would face an insurmountable fillibuster threat. Republicans do not have the majority in the Senate.

One of the legislative agreements reached in the proposed bill was that the grant the Department of Homeland Security the ability to shut down the border of asylum requests met a specific daily threshold. Unless you were asleep, this is exactly what Biden was forced to pursue by executive order as Congress failed to do it's job.

Again, you seem to be awfully upset that Biden is enforcing the law that despite your protests you undoubtedly agree with. Thanking Biden for cutting through the partisan deadlock ought to have been your response.

---

Why then did Biden just months ago say he was unable to do anything without an act of Congress?

No, I do not agree with you. Putting into law an allowance of up to 5,000 migrants a day average per week or 8,500 migrants in a single day before action is taken is morally & practically reprehensible. I equate that similarly to California’s retail theft laws where police don’t get involved unless it’s above X dollars in theft. A crime is a crime. The goal should be 0 illegal border crossings per day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Why then did Biden just months ago say he was unable to do anything without an act of Congress?

No, I do not agree with you. Putting into law an allowance of up to 5,000 migrants a day average per week or 8,500 migrants in a single day before action is taken is morally & practically reprehensible. I equate that similarly to California’s retail theft laws where police don’t get involved unless it’s above X dollars in theft. A crime is a crime. The goal should be 0 illegal border crossings per day.

---

You seem to have forgotten that the asylum practices of the United States is dictated by federal law, not by your moral standpoint on the issue. People applying for asylum at a designated port of entry is not a crime, their subsequent allowance into the country while the asylum claim is pending is defined by title 8.

Code:

---

8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum
U.S. Code

(a)Authority to apply for asylum
(1)In general
Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.


(2)Exceptions
(A)Safe third country
Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an alien if the Attorney General determines that the alien may be removed, pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral agreement, to a country (other than the country of the alien’s nationality or, in the case of an alien having no nationality, the country of the alien’s last habitual residence) in which the alien’s life or freedom would not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and where the alien would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection, unless the Attorney General finds that it is in the public interest for the alien to receive asylum in the United States.

(A)shall not remove or return the alien to the alien’s country of nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, the country of the alien’s last habitual residence;

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You seem to have forgotten that the asylum practices of the United States is dictated by federal law, not by your moral standpoint on the issue. People applying for asylum at a designated port of entry is not a crime, their subsequent allowance into the country while the asylum claim is pending is defined by title 8.

Code:

---

8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum
U.S. Code

(a)Authority to apply for asylum
(1)In general
Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.


(2)Exceptions
(A)Safe third country
Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an alien if the Attorney General determines that the alien may be removed, pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral agreement, to a country (other than the country of the alien’s nationality or, in the case of an alien having no nationality, the country of the alien’s last habitual residence) in which the alien’s life or freedom would not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and where the alien would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection, unless the Attorney General finds that it is in the public interest for the alien to receive asylum in the United States.

(A)shall not remove or return the alien to the alien’s country of nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, the country of the alien’s last habitual residence;

---

---

I really hope Trump is re-elected and actually deports all illegal aliens.

You want to come into this country, do it legally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Do you ever get tired of posting outright lies in a feeble attempt to undermine fact? You literally have zero credibility on any topic, save your own dementia.

---

Imagine having as little self awareness as Seran to say something like this about literally anyone else with a straight face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You used to have some intelligent insights.

I on the other hand, have never had an intelligent thought even once in my entire miserable welfare addicted unshowered pedo life.

---

This is correct.

Ive seen my toddler do the same squat Joe did on the stage in France.

Check out Biden shitting his pants at 3:05 :rofl:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FafV30Og4c