The First 100 days

Now that's funny.

 

I agree. They should make the penalty commensurate with the rate that it happens - less often than being struck by lighting...TWICE, dying from a flesh eating bacteria, being eaten by a shark, hitting the roulette color 20 times in a row or hitting a hole in one.

 

Paul Ryan's recent positions --

Can you look at this and guess which years where election years?

2014 against amnesty
2015 for amnesty
2016 against amnesty
2017 for amnesty

Spoiler

2014 & 2016 were election years

 

Greatness....

 

They are the greatest people on earth
Yet he does not want them back
How do you explain that?

 

Make your own country less of a ******** you *******.

 

It is kind of weird how this non-US-citizen spends all of his time attempting to meddle in US politics, while at the same time doing nothing to improve the country he used to be president of

 

It is unbelievable how he has turned things around in his mind; somehow we are the bad guys for trying to enforce our laws. Why doesn't he propose that Mexico invite all illegal aliens in the US from Mexico to come home and set up a fund to help them? Why not? WHY NOT?

 

Yep.

 

I saw a FB post with this pic and someone commented he would never let his kids kiss trump. Okay, *******. It would be labeled racist had someone said the same about Obama.

 

It appears Trump was simultaneously Amsterdam and Houston

 

Yes, the first step to healing this country is to end the acceptable use of the double-standard

 

Hard to imagine Obama ever saying this to us, no matter the disaster that befell us

 

Coulter weighs in

 

Mattis --

"If I say 6 and the President says half a dozen, they're going to say I disagree with him. Let's just get over that."​

 

I'd never let Trump kiss my kids, or move on them like b_tches, or grab them by their whoohaws. Mine are part native. Does that make me racist?

 

You missed the point completely as usual. The point was that the media would have labeled it racist and ran with it for a week.

 

Didn't say it does. Said the media would say you were if it was your saying you wouldn't let Obama kiss your kids.

Yep.

 

Trump has sent his best gay dude to Germany in a plot to trick Merkel into marriage

 

Poor Paul Ryan is kind of stuck
On the one hand, he knows DACA is an unconstitutional law that benefits people who broke the law
On the other hand, his political funders are demanding their cheap labor
What's a poor boy to do?

 

How do you guys look at this?
I see compounded felonies and the admission of fraud

 

Paul Ryan in 2015
DACA blatantly unconstitutional

 

IMO, arguments over DACA are pointless. It was an illegal executive action.
It was just another one of Obama's tricks, this one aimed specifically at the 2016 elections.
The fact that this debate goes on and without any recognition of its unconstitutionality is a bad look for our education system.

I would make a similar simple argument on the morality of DACA.
Dreamers is a nice name but the truth is they are illegal immigrants who the law says are to be removed.
This idea of putting citizens of a foreign country above your own citizens strikes me as ridiculous. I say morality requires putting the US and its citizens first. Sure we well help out others around the world, as well repeatedly have. But the USA must come first.

 

As a historical reminder, DAPA was rejected by federal courts 4 separate times. DAPA stands for "Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program.'' Like DACA, DAPA was an executive action by Obama (dated Nov 2014)

26 states joined in an action to shut it down and it was enjoined by District Court Judge Andrew Hanen (Brownsville) Feb 2015.
DOJ appealed the injunction to the 5th Circuit (on merits), and lost (2-1).
DOJ then appealed to the 5th Circuit again on standing and lost again
DOJ then filed an appeal with the SCOTUS. The Supremes heard arguments Apr 18th, 2016, published their order Jun 24 affirming the injunction by a per curium decision (split court 4-4)
That is four times.

One more interesting part is that, since the original District Court ruling was on the injunction only, it did not address the question of constitutionality. But, in order to establish the scope of the state and federal argument, the Supreme Court did expand their hearing beyond the injunction to listen to the merit of the Obama admin’s arguments.

Here is what Greg Abbott said at the time --

“The action taken by the President was an unauthorized abuse of presidential power that trampled the Constitution, and the Supreme Court rightly denied the President the ability to grant amnesty contrary to immigration laws. As the President himself said, he is not a king who can unilaterally change and write immigration laws. Today’s ruling is also a victory for all law-abiding Americans—including the millions of immigrants who came to America following the rule of law.” ​