BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 He claimed that a judge wasn't qualified to preside over his case due to his Mexican heritage. I don't really care if you want to nitpick my chosen phrasing as the main point there was Trump's history of anti-immigrant rhetoric, which Trump himself admitted in the back and forth over Curiel. When you go case-by-case through Trump's supposed racist or anti-immigrant rhetoric it all comes up pretty tame. His "history" is wildly overblown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 11:56 AM) He claimed an individual judge was biased. You said that he said Mexican judges were unqualified. That's not what was said and it is a complete mischaracterization. A biased judge is not qualified. He claimed an American judge was biased because of his Mexican heritage. If Mexican heritage potentially makes a judge biased, that would mean we should be suspicious of bias in all judges with Mexican heritage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Sure, should have said "a judge." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 A biased judge is not qualified. Not really. The only qualifications to be a judge are residency and a law degree, at least in Illinois. Oh, you also have to be a citizen. Sorry dreamers, DACA isn't going to be doing you much good in that career path. At least you've got a deferral to panic about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) There is absolutely nothing racist or anti-immigrant about securing our southern border by building a wall. At all. It's something we desperately need to do, and for amnesty to work needs to happen in conjunction. It's a national security issue most importantly, I don't see how you could be reasonably against it. This is a requirement for DACA: You must not have been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, three or more other misdemeanors, and must not pose a threat to national security or public safety. LINK Please tell me again how ending this program affects national security in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Uh what are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 11:33 AM) There is absolutely nothing racist or anti-immigrant about securing our southern border by building a wall. At all. It's something we desperately need to do, and for amnesty to work needs to happen in conjunction. It's a national security issue most importantly, I don't see how you could be reasonably against it. Even Trump, the man you support, knows the wall is asinine and would be ineffective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) Even Trump, the man you support, knows the wall is asinine and would be ineffective. He just wants it for ego purposes. He can talk about and admire the stupid wall. I wonder when Mexico is going to cut a check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted September 5, 2017 Author Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) Uh what are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 10:25 AM) Uh what are you talking about? I guess I need to hold your hand to explain.... One of your arguments for ending DACA is that this is for national security. One of the requirements of DACA is that you remain a law-abiding citizen. Otherwise, you no longer qualify. Your national security argument holds no water with regards to this program. But you know that. Continue trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Trump never called Fiorina ugly either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 One of your arguments for ending DACA is that this is for national security. No. Where did I say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 12:37 PM) No. Where did I say that? QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 11:33 AM) There is absolutely nothing racist or anti-immigrant about securing our southern border by building a wall. At all. It's something we desperately need to do, and for amnesty to work needs to happen in conjunction. It's a national security issue most importantly, I don't see how you could be reasonably against it. Here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 He's dead. You killed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) Here? Yea I was talking about the wall/securing the border, not DACA. Reading comprehension, everyone! He might "write code" but I'm not sure he "speaks English". Edited September 5, 2017 by Alexeihyeess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 01:16 PM) Here? Give him a break. It's hard to multi-task posting between here, 4chan and r/Donald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) Yea I was talking about the wall/securing the border, not DACA. Reading comprehension, everyone! It's still a bad argument. QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) He might "write code" but I'm not sure he "speaks English". Cute. Edited September 5, 2017 by Iwritecode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 04:35 PM) Yea I was talking about the wall/securing the border, not DACA. Reading comprehension, everyone! He might "write code" but I'm not sure he "speaks English". Really couldn't help yourself, could you? That joke gets a 0/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaconOnAStick Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Look, I'm sure he speaks English. I'm sure Sqwert does too. But, I'm equally certain that like SS was doing earlier in this thread they will gladly misunderstand something on purpose so they can take issue with what is being said. Trying to take one little morsel and ripping it out of context to try and start a new debate on their own terms. Its dishonest and unintelligent, especially coming from this guy: You could easily help raise the discourse by saying exactly everything you just said without adding that 2nd to last sentence. Just saying. He should take some of his own advice. Nothing lowers the discourse quite like deliberately misreading somebodies arguments. And if you disagree with me, fine...that's cool. Its America. But dont lower yourself to that level and fling poo at someone just because you dont like what they're saying. Take an actual position, have some integrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 QUOTE (Alexeihyeess @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 03:35 PM) Yea I was talking about the wall/securing the border, not DACA. Reading comprehension, everyone! He might "write code" but I'm not sure he "speaks English". Maybe he should get a visit from ICE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 5, 2017 -> 05:08 PM) Maybe he should get a visit from ICE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 I do think it would be interesting to see the people who want these members of the working class deported actually do their jobs, because they wont and dont want to. The wall is a political set of loud pipes on a Z27 Camaro. Donnie is still 0/10 on his promises in his contract to his voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 In the photo accompanying Trumps Labor Day post about the future with American Labor made with American hands, Melania is wearing an Italian designer dress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Trump gets millions from golf members. CEOs and lobbyists get access to president Dozens of lobbyists, contractors and others who make their living influencing the government pay President Trump’s companies for membership in his private golf clubs, a status that can put them in close contact with the president, a USA TODAY investigation found. Members of the clubs Trump has visited most often as president — in Florida, New Jersey and Virginia — include at least 50 executives whose companies hold federal contracts and 21 lobbyists and trade group officials. Two-thirds played on one of the 58 days the president was there, according to scores they posted online. Because membership lists at Trump’s clubs are secret, the public has until now been unable to assess the conflicts they could create. USA TODAY found the names of 4,500 members by reviewing social media and a public website golfers use to track their handicaps, then researched and contacted hundreds to determine whether they had business with the government. The review shows that, for the first time in U.S. history, wealthy people with interests before the government have a chance for close and confidential access to the president as a result of payments that enrich him personally. It is a view of the president available to few other Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Draining the swamp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts