IDBillzFan Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 You really are a loser But tomorrow he can be a winner...and you'll still be an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 But tomorrow he can be a winner...and you'll still be an idiot. How Churchillesque of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Nigel Farage also write (sic) that he was "especially pleased" at Trump's "very positive reaction to the idea that Sir Winston Churchill's bust should be put back in the Oval Office." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 You really are a loser You're an idiot. Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I'm telling you the hysteria is not because of the wall. I work with many immigrants at work and we make damn sure they're legal. They have illegal family members that come back and forth at will. In talking to them, yes they don't like trump but its being marketed as Obama will legalize all illegal aliens before he leaves office. They showed me pamphlet papers touting new legalization laws with Obamas face on it. That all here before January xyz will be allowed to remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beef Jerky Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 I'm telling you the hysteria is not because of the wall. I work with many immigrants at work and we make damn sure they're legal. They have illegal family members that come back and forth at will. In talking to them, yes they don't like trump but its being marketed as Obama will legalize all illegal aliens before he leaves office. They showed me pamphlet papers touting new legalization laws with Obamas face on it. That all here before January xyz will be allowed to remain. Wow someone is trolling illegals... I member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 Poll: 74 Percent of Californians Want to End Sanctuary Cities The vast majority of residents living in California would like see sanctuary cities barred, a state home to multiple jurisdictions which refuse to abide by federal immigration laws. Roughly 74 percent of California residents want to see an end to sanctuary city policies...according to a poll by UC Berkeley. The issue to end sanctuary cities in the state crosses racial and party lines, with 65 percent of Hispanics registering their agreement, while 70 percent of independents, 82 percent of Republicans, and 73 percent of Democrats feel the same. During President Donald Trump’s term, sanctuary cities could see a cut in federal funding and potentially even harsh pushback from the Department of Justice under likely Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Of course.........that's just the "dirt people", .......the "cloud people" disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Dutch PM to immigrants: Integrate or GTFO: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/f8cfd8b0f9d8491e8b4f42345762c241 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 25, 2017 Author Share Posted January 25, 2017 Ted Cruz Presents Bill That Would Allow States To Bar Refugee Resettlement It should be up to a state governor to determine if they want to allow resettlement of refugees in their state. At least, that’s the states’ rights issue that Texas Senator Ted Cruz and two of his colleagues put forth on Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 Ted Cruz Presents Bill That Would Allow States To Bar Refugee Resettlement It should be up to a state governor to determine if they want to allow resettlement of refugees in their state. At least, that’s the states’ rights issue that Texas Senator Ted Cruz and two of his colleagues put forth on Tuesday. While I'd happily defer to Cruz on states' rights issues most of the time, as he is an excellent jurist...this is patently ridiculous unless you also bar refugees from interstate travel, AND have the tools and processes in place to track illegal immigrants, which states do not allow based on arguments of states' rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 27, 2017 Author Share Posted January 27, 2017 When did Slate become Salon ? The Siege of Sanctuary Cities Has Begun. Siege? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 27, 2017 Author Share Posted January 27, 2017 Trump’s radical immigration plan: Enforce the law. Can he do that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 When did Slate become Salon ? The Siege of Sanctuary Cities Has Begun. Siege? Don't you love when liberals champion state rights...when they're on the outs in washington? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 The Washington Post, citing unidentified senior U.S. officials, reported that Trump cut their first call short with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull after the conversation turn to a deal that would allow mostly Muslim refugees rejected by Australia to be resettled in the US. Trump tweeted Wednesday night, “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/02/trump-reportedly-accuses-australian-pm-seeking-to-export-next-boston-bombers.html Christian persecution seen in more locations across the globe, new report shows The report comes on the heels of another study by the Center for Studies on New Religions that showed nearly 90,000 Christians were killed for their faith in 2016 and that as many as 600 million were prevented from practicing their faith through intimidation, forced conversions, bodily harm or even death. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/02/02/christian-persecution-seen-in-more-locations-across-globe-new-report-shows.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 The Washington Post, citing unidentified senior U.S. officials, reported that Trump cut their first call short with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull after the conversation turn to a deal that would allow mostly Muslim refugees rejected by Australia to be resettled in the US. Trump tweeted Wednesday night, “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/02/trump-reportedly-accuses-australian-pm-seeking-to-export-next-boston-bombers.html Christian persecution seen in more locations across the globe, new report shows The report comes on the heels of another study by the Center for Studies on New Religions that showed nearly 90,000 Christians were killed for their faith in 2016 and that as many as 600 million were prevented from practicing their faith through intimidation, forced conversions, bodily harm or even death. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/02/02/christian-persecution-seen-in-more-locations-across-globe-new-report-shows.html And Trump's actions against innocents will not ease those tensions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 The Washington Post, citing unidentified senior U.S. officials, reported that Trump cut their first call short with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull after the conversation turn to a deal that would allow mostly Muslim refugees rejected by Australia to be resettled in the US. Trump tweeted Wednesday night, “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb deal.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/02/trump-reportedly-accuses-australian-pm-seeking-to-export-next-boston-bombers.html Christian persecution seen in more locations across the globe, new report shows The report comes on the heels of another study by the Center for Studies on New Religions that showed nearly 90,000 Christians were killed for their faith in 2016 and that as many as 600 million were prevented from practicing their faith through intimidation, forced conversions, bodily harm or even death. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/02/02/christian-persecution-seen-in-more-locations-across-globe-new-report-shows.html Well, the Progs/Lefties/Dems do have a lot in common with them now don't they. Because nothing says "tolerance" like a Prog/Lefty/Dem rioting on campus because they just don't want to hear what a gay Conservative man has to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Aussies to send 1,200 + Muslim refugees they refuse to let in to their country to the US because of a backdoor deal B. O. made. I say, okay... send them to Guantanamo. There's room there now since the past POS let most of the vermin out of that internment camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Aussies to send 1,200 + Muslim refugees they refuse to let in to their country to the US because of a backdoor deal B. O. made. I say, okay... send them to Guantanamo. There's room there now since the past POS let most of the vermin out of that internment camp. That will sure increase the risk of us getting hit with terror attacks, but that's what Trump wants so he might do it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 That will sure increase the risk of us getting hit with terror attacks, but that's what Trump wants so he might do it You need to back this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 I was in Australia a couple of years ago when their former Prime Minister Paul Keating openly questions the Australia-US alliance. In effect he said that Australia always had America's back, but he wasn't at all certain that America would ever again have Australia's back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Not sure where to put this so I'll put this here. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/the-slaughterhouse-since-2011-at-least-13000-hanged-in-syrian-prison-where-death-was-the-simplest-thing “The horrors depicted in this report reveal a hidden, monstrous campaign, authorized at the highest levels of the Syrian government, aimed at crushing any form of dissent within the Syrian population,” Maalouf said.While the most recent data is from 2015, Maalouf said there is no reason to believe the practice has stopped since then, with thousands more probably killed. “These executions take place after a sham trial that lasts over a minute or two minutes, but they are authorized by the highest levels of authority,” including the Grand Mufti, a top religious authority in Syria, and the defence minister, she said. The chilling accounts in Tuesday’s report came from interviews with 31 former detainees and over 50 other officials and experts, including former guards and judges.According to the findings, detainees were told they would be transferred to civilian detention centres but were taken instead to another building in the facility and hanged. “They walked in the ‘train,’ so they had their heads down and were trying to catch the shirt of the person in front of them. The first time I saw them, I was horrified. They were being taken to the slaughterhouse,” Hamid, a former detainee, told Amnesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Not sure where to put this so I'll put this here. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/the-slaughterhouse-since-2011-at-least-13000-hanged-in-syrian-prison-where-death-was-the-simplest-thing Horrible! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Horrible! Y'all hiring at the laundry matt ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Y'all hiring at the laundry matt ? He doesn't work there!! He washes his clothes there because: A. He's a loser B. Mom's tired of doing it C. He can't find a woman to do it for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 He doesn't work there!! He washes his clothes there because: A. He's a loser B. Mom's tired of doing it C. He can't find a woman to do it for him. These Syrians need jobs. Gator can rent out a room and put in a good word with the laundry matt owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 These Syrians need jobs. Gator can rent out a room and put in a good word with the laundry matt owner. Right now, they just don't want to be executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Right now, they just don't want to be executed. Bomb the Syrian presidents house or nah ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 He doesn't work there!! He washes his clothes there because: A. He's a loser B. Mom's tired of doing it C. He can't find a woman to do it for him. Damn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Damn! That's ok. You've got PLENTY of time to get Mary Sue to go to the Spring Fling with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 That's ok. You've got PLENTY of time to get Mary Sue to go to the Spring Fling with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 8, 2017 Author Share Posted February 8, 2017 Southwest border is ‘gaping wound’ in homeland security, DHS chief says Washington Times, by Stephen Dinan Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) 9th circuit's ruling is in... Court shoots down the ban. Edited February 9, 2017 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Here's the opinion. http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf Trump's response: "See you in court, the security of our nation is at stake!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 9th circuit's ruling is in... Court shoots down the ban. I'm curious of their reasoning. The interesting thing is that although the logic behind the ban is !@#$ed sideways, and the XO itself a goddamn disaster, the administration actually has a legal point. The President does have broad powers to restrict travel by foreigners from overseas. They don't extend to banning travel by Green Card holders, but do extend to visa holders. And a visa doesn't give someone the right to enter the country, it gives them the right to petition to enter the country - meaning, it lets them ask Customs if they can come in. So I'm curious about the court's decision - I wonder if they shot down the ban because even though the President has that authority, the exercise of it was so !@#$ed up that they had no choice but to kill it in toto. Or if they really decided the President doesn't have that authority. Or, representative of this administration's inability to do anything without turning it into a circus, the administration simply couldn't put together a coherent argument in the time they had, or never gave it a second thought and were blindsided by the challenge. Or if there was some other rationale. Here's the opinion. http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf Trump's response: "See you in court, the security of our nation is at stake!" And...looks like all of the above. The administration simply couldn't get out of its own way, and Trump's twitterrhia worked against him. Thus...the checks and balances start to come in to effect. The Oompa-Loompa-in-Chief, it turns out, can't do whatever the !@#$ he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Thus...the checks and balances start to come in to effect. The Oompa-Loompa-in-Chief, it turns out, can't do whatever the !@#$ he wants. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Amen. But it's still not stopping my sister from making insane Hitler rants on Facebook. I've got to write a DC-Tom-bot to deal with her... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 But it's still not stopping my sister from making insane Hitler rants on Facebook. I've got to write a DC-Tom-bot to deal with her... Or my ladyfriend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Or my ladyfriend. I thought you went all "I'm not with her" after she went all "I'm With Her?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 10, 2017 Share Posted February 10, 2017 I thought you went all "I'm not with her" after she went all "I'm With Her?" Probably should have... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts