Trump secured our southern border in 100days! The democrats told us it couldn't be done.......what morons!

We didn't need anything but a new president!

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
Trump secured our southern border in 100days! The democrats told us it couldn't be done.......what morons!

We didn't need anything but a new president!

Hahahahaha!

Deporting 2 year old America citizens!

Hahahahaha!

The MAGA FUCKWIT is doing SO WELL!

No, and the tactics are in violation of the S. Ct. Violation of the law of the land bring the Constitution.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
No, and the tactics are in violation of the S. Ct. Violation of the law of the land bring the Constitution.

All tactics?

I think you're painting with a broad brush.

I dig it.
I dig that border crossing is down 95%.
I dig Trump called Mexico and offered our military.
I dig that Trump got some mass deportations going, as a good American I of course expect our POTUS to follow the law and our SCOTUS to reign trump in.

I do think I'd buy a MAGA hat if Trump would, ( whoopsie!) drop a few dozen bombs on drug cartel headquarters and conquest Haiti.

Secure the border, illegal border crossings down 90+%, is a fact and an achievement for any president.

Deportations and cleanup are a separate issue.

Strange how there wasn't a single judge interfering with Obamas millions

I would have figured after reading the title of thread that the subject would have been about the Felon in the Oval Office embracing Putin and abandoning our European allies. Go figure....

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
Trump secured our southern border in 100days! The democrats told us it couldn't be done.......what morons!

We didn't need anything but a new president!

Hahahahaha!

Deporting 2 year old America citizens!

Hahahahaha!

The MAGA FUCKWIT is doing SO WELL!

Arababble!

Just reading the headlines and not understanding the story????


.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
I dig it.
I dig that border crossing is down 95%.
I dig Trump called Mexico and offered our military.
I dig that Trump got some mass deportations going, as a good American I of course expect our POTUS to follow the law and our SCOTUS to reign trump in.

I do think I'd buy a MAGA hat if Trump would, ( whoopsie!) drop a few dozen bombs on drug cartel headquarters and conquest Haiti.

He isn't done yet. He did declare the cartels terrorists. That opens the door on some nice options.

I still wonder why the lefties are demanding "due process" for all illegals now, but not when Obama deported them???

For the same reason that checks and balances matter, we are not like your Russian motherland Yakob.

Shame that you are too dumb to follow along.

That turd Trump might not know if it is his responsibility to uphold the Constitution, but it is.

We are a country ruled by law, despite what the authoritarian asshole in the Oval Office might think.

National Security Adviser?

Wormtongue?


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...e1e09ba0d4fa1f&ei=47

Who will be the next National Security Adviser? Trump says Stephen Miller may be up for the job

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...e1e09ba0d4fa1f&ei=69

Trump admin scrambles as $2.2M Hegseth flub catches White House off-guard: report
Story by Adam Nichols • 2h • 2 min read

An order from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s office grounded 11 flights loaded with heavy artillery headed to Ukraine.

The problem? Nobody in the Pentagon, the State Department, Ukraine — or even the White House — knew anything about it.

According to an exclusive report from Reuters, the canceled flights sparked panicked communications from Ukraine and a scramble to get the planes in the air. A week later, the artillery was headed to the war-torn country, with an additional cost of $2.2 million, Reuters reported.

The report claims the grounding of the flights came from a verbal order from Hegseth’s office and followed a Jan. 30 Oval Office meeting at which Trump floated the idea of stopping Ukraine aid.

But no order to halt the aid was given and the president was completely unaware of Hegseth’s action, sources told Reuters — though the White House had a different take when contacted.

https://youtu.be/rv6izDmAwMM?si=0Trumhj5APQ63lS8

Why Trump Really Fired Waltz - What the Media Missed!

"Do you think Trump prioritizes loyalty over national security?"

"He has the nuclear codes!"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...019fd6f954fa8f&ei=13

Facing serious new allegations, Pete Hegseth advances purge of Pentagon leaders
Story by Steve Benen • 1h • 3 min read

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
Trump secured our southern border in 100days! The democrats told us it couldn't be done.......what morons!

We didn't need anything but a new president!

Trump himself admitted in the ABC interview that there are not enough resources to give each illegal the mandated hearing before deportation. The obvious conclusion is that his minions can not do the job inside the legislated boundaries. Competence took a back seat to loyalty and an ability avert eyes from the consequences.

He is swinging a corked bat, and bragging about his home runs (conveniently not mentioning foul balls).
Meanwhile, the umpire is under the stands with a twelve-pack, ruing the day he took the job...

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
Trump secured our southern border in 100days! The democrats told us it couldn't be done.......what morons!

We didn't need anything but a new president!

Trump himself admitted in the ABC interview that there are not enough resources to give each illegal the mandated hearing before deportation. The obvious conclusion is that his minions can not do the job inside the legislated boundaries. Competence took a back seat to loyalty and an ability avert eyes from the consequences.

He is swinging a corked bat, and bragging about his home runs (conveniently not mentioning foul balls).
Meanwhile, the umpire is under the stands with a twelve-pack, ruing the day he took the job...

Why does President Trump have to give EACH illegal a mandated hearing?????

No other president has????

What changed?

.

The 5th Amendment. You have been given the cases thst explain this to you. We are sorry you’re Texas education made reading hard.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The 5th Amendment. You have been given the cases thst explain this to you. We are sorry you’re Texas education made reading hard.

Hmm, when the question. Is "what changed" and you answer with what was the same.. well, .. sigh... you've received advice in the past that you should stay far away from commenting on the Texas Education system.

Where were your complaints for Obama and bidens actions?

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
sigh... you've received advice in the past that you should stay far away from commenting on the Texas Education system.

Could you show off your advanced degrees for us again and maybe give a lecture on how only mental midgets believe that tariffs are taxes?

As I have commented before, you and your advanced degrees make the case for the need for education reform on a daily basis.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The 5th Amendment. You have been given the cases thst explain this to you. We are sorry you’re Texas education made reading hard.

Hmm, when the question. Is "what changed" and you answer with what was the same.. well, .. sigh... you've received advice in the past that you should stay far away from commenting on the Texas Education system.

Where were your complaints for Obama and bidens actions?

The question is why do they get hearings.

The answer is the 5th Amendment demands due process to this class of individuals.

The Constitution as amended demands it.

You are proving everyday Jeff that your civic and legal understanding is the product of self inflicted idiocy.

Remember our debate about treaties? It is the same here.
Since at least 1952 through April, 2025, the S. Ct., has held due process applied to migrants in this nation state for purposes of deportation to challenge the government. The application of the 5th Amendment. Go read the cases, constitutional due process rights apply where the Constitution governs.

I do not care what the Texas contingent wants. I care what the law requires.

You obviously chose to remain ignorant how school systems are funded. Eek, off to advise some school districts.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The 5th Amendment. You have been given the cases thst explain this to you. We are sorry you’re Texas education made reading hard.

Hmm, when the question. Is "what changed" and you answer with what was the same.. well, .. sigh... you've received advice in the past that you should stay far away from commenting on the Texas Education system.

Where were your complaints for Obama and bidens actions?

The question is why do they get hearings.

The answer is the 5th Amendment demands due process to this class of individuals.

The Constitution as amended demands it.

You are proving everyday Jeff that your civic and legal understanding is the product of self inflicted idiocy.

Remember our debate about treaties? It is the same here.
Since at least 1952 through April, 2025, the S. Ct., has held due process applied to migrants in this nation state for purposes of deportation to challenge the government. The application of the 5th Amendment. Go read the cases, constitutional due process rights apply where the Constitution governs.

I do not care what the Texas contingent wants. I care what the law requires.

You obviously chose to remain ignorant how school systems are funded. Well, off to advise some school districts.

Jtex question is clearly, “Why does the president have to provide a hearing..?”

The question was not, as you frame it, “ What has changed?”

My response stands: the Constitution as amended by the 5th Amendment and applied by the S. Ct., since 1952 through 2025 providing and mandating hearings as part of due process rights this class of individuals possess.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:


No other president has????

What changed?

.

Plain reading of the question

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The 5th Amendment. You have been given the cases thst explain this to you. We are sorry you’re Texas education made reading hard.

Hmm, when the question. Is "what changed" and you answer with what was the same.. well, .. sigh... you've received advice in the past that you should stay far away from commenting on the Texas Education system.

Where were your complaints for Obama and bidens actions?

The question is why do they get hearings.

The answer is the 5th Amendment demands due process to this class of individuals.

The Constitution as amended demands it.

You are proving everyday Jeff that your civic and legal understanding is the product of self inflicted idiocy.

Remember our debate about treaties? It is the same here.
Since at least 1952 through April, 2025, the S. Ct., has held due process applied to migrants in this nation state for purposes of deportation to challenge the government. The application of the 5th Amendment. Go read the cases, constitutional due process rights apply where the Constitution governs.

I do not care what the Texas contingent wants. I care what the law requires.

You obviously chose to remain ignorant how school systems are funded. Well, off to advise some school districts.

Jtex question is clearly, “Why does the president have to provide a hearing..?”

The question was not, as you frame it, “ What has changed?”

My response stands: the Constitution as amended by the 5th Amendment and applied by the S. Ct., since 1952 through 2025 providing and mandating hearings as part of due process rights this class of individuals possess.

You are so full of shit your eyes are brown!!!!

Did Ike have to have individual hearings during operation wet back?

Did Obama have individual hearings for his deportees?

No?

What changed?

As you know, nothing changed!!!!! Illegals are illegals!

And you are a stunted leftist moron.......with an agenda.....


.

My eyes are blue.

The law is clear and yes.

They receiver due process rights including hearings. That holding was reasserted April 2025.

You don’t like the truth. That is your problem.

Go read the caselaw. It has been given to you.

Remember even enemy non combatants not in the YS were entitled to due process: civilian trials, right to counsel, right to Habeas petitions, and burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

President Eisenhower used federal troops to enforce the S. Ct. precedent.

1952 through now, they are entitled to due process. They includes hearings. The fact you do not like it matters nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
My eyes are blue.

The law is clear and yes.

They receiver due process rights including hearings. That holding was reasserted April 2025.

You don’t like the truth. That is your problem.

Go read the caselaw. It has been given to you.

Remember even enemy non combatants not in the YS were entitled to due process: civilian trials, right to counsel, right to Habeas petitions, and burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

President Eisenhower used federal troops to enforce the S. Ct. precedent.

1952 through now, they are entitled to due process. They includes hearings. The fact you do not like it matters nothing.

So bill clinton, George bush and Obama are criminals flouting the constitution! Where is your fake outrage junior????


.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
My eyes are blue.

The law is clear and yes.

They receiver due process rights including hearings. That holding was reasserted April 2025.

You don’t like the truth. That is your problem.

Go read the caselaw. It has been given to you.

Remember even enemy non combatants not in the YS were entitled to due process: civilian trials, right to counsel, right to Habeas petitions, and burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

President Eisenhower used federal troops to enforce the S. Ct. precedent.

1952 through now, they are entitled to due process. They includes hearings. The fact you do not like it matters nothing.

So bill clinton, George bush and Obama are criminals flouting the constitution! Where is your fake outrage junior????


.

What is abundantly clear is.

American politician = CORRUPT CRIMINAL

American voter = STUPID, BRAINLESS, BRAINWASHED, IDIOT!

How did they refuse to follow the orders of the S. Ct.?

I’m on record, President Clinton should have been convicted on the Senate. He lost his law license over all that.

President Obama provided hearings. President Bush did.

What they did not do was when the S. Ct., ruled say, “I ain’t doing that.”

The FS r Congress would not provide funding to hire more AlJ’s is partially why we have so many folks hear now.

Oh, and the Fed court just stopped stripping Venezuelans of their legal protections. The flights to Libya have been stopped to.

The S. Ct., shall have the final say. If this Regime wants to defy the S. Ct., again it will continue to destroy the Constitution and wallow in illegitimacy.

April 2025 spying the 5th Amendment ruled this Administration must provide hearings. That holding is based on Supreme Court precedent going back to at least 1952.

President Bush followed the S. Cr., concerning non combatants down in Cuba.

You don much w people, but the Executive must follow the rules to muck w folks. The rules are all that protect any of us.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
How did they refuse to follow the orders of the S. Ct.?

I’m on record, President Clinton should have been convicted on the Senate. He lost his law license over all that.

President Obama provided hearings. President Bush did.

What they did not do was when the S. Ct., ruled say, “I ain’t doing that.”

The FS r Congress would not provide funding to hire more AlJ’s is partially why we have so many folks hear now.

Oh, and the Fed court just stopped stripping Venezuelans of their legal protections. The flights to Libya have been stopped to.

The S. Ct., shall have the final say. If this Regime wants to defy the S. Ct., again it will continue to destroy the Constitution and wallow in illegitimacy.

April 2025 spying the 5th Amendment ruled this Administration must provide hearings. That holding is based on Supreme Court precedent going back to at least 1952.

President Bush followed the S. Cr., concerning non combatants down in Cuba.

You don much w people, but the Executive must follow the rules to muck w folks. The rules are all that protect any of us.

Well folks! For all to see! The complete failure of our educational system!


A college educated American lawyer and he can't even write English!

Truth and knowledge are painful.

Or maybe you are not this stupid just a lier led by hate and anger.

Naw, I chose to believe it is simply you are cognitively unable to read.

Probably both.

Jtex, either way I’ll keep praying for you. Sadly, Pharoah had ti be Pharaoh right.

Find a S. Ct., case that is that is still good precedent that says anything I said was wrong.

Of course, the State of Texas has been as successful on the courts as this Regime.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Truth and knowledge are painful.

Or maybe you are not this stupid just a lier led by hate and anger.

Naw, I chose to believe it is simply you are cognitively unable to read.

Probably both.

Jtex, either way I’ll keep praying for you. Sadly, Pharoah had ti be Pharaoh right.

Find a S. Ct., case that is that is still good precedent that says anything I said was wrong.

Of course, the State of Texas has been as successful on the courts as this Regime.

Maybe its just the educational system in kentucky???? I mean the the Beverly Hillbillies came from that area.....I think Jethro Bodine probably had a better command of english? He also knew his cyphering and gosentas!

Why didn't Obama need a court trial for the illegals he deported???

Was it just liberal privilege? Or could it have been activist judges??

The Beverly Hill Billies came from TN.

But, I bet they understood what a ruling from the S. Ct., is.

Can anyone decipher this?


https://youtu.be/aTUQ-yR4v-g?si=C_IMs9KaVrosX_Zw

Senator Merkley pressed FBI Director Kash Patel on upholding the Constitutional right to due process during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on May 8, 2025. Senator Merkley raised concerns that Director Patel seemed unaware that due process applies to “all persons” under the Constitution

=============================================

I think this video explains:

https://youtu.be/1j9Wwd7tIh8?si=cIud51i_py-qovF7

Judge Luttig: No Question that Trump is 'of the school of constitutional denialism'