Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
In a thread about immigration that has been around for a decade and a half, it's pretty strange to me that there is hardly any conversation about the current bill that could very well improve things quite a bit that republicans, who never shut up about the issue, are about to kill for purely political purposes.
Nobody wants to talk about how full of shit that party is?
I mean if immigration is important to you, where is the outrage over the one party that is suddenly disinclined to do anything about the issue they claim to care about most?
Yeah… the silence about the GOP Border “Crisis” is deafening, both here and in the real world.
I brought it up a couple pages ago...didn't get any traction. Instead, let's all be hyper focused on an isolated incident in New York or something. Not saying that is not a horrible thing because it is....
..BUT THERE IS FINALLY BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION that one party is just completely ignoring solely because Donald Trump told them to. A possible solution to this problem is literally within reach and the republicans are saying "nah, we're just going to continue to complain about it and blame the party who attempted to fix the issue."
And you know what? Because they are so good at messaging to their mindless base, their side of the argument will likely win over the American people. This thread is a nice little microcosm of what is happening in this country right now. lol. Biden is getting blown out of the water on this issue, yet I bet the vast majority of the people who just blindly blame him and the democrats are not even fucking aware of what is happening this week.
Talk about dereliction of duty. These nimrods are attempting to impeach the Director of Homeland Security for failing to secure the border WHILE THEY ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM A BILL THAT IS LITERALLY DESIGNED TO DO JUST THAT.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
In a thread about immigration that has been around for a decade and a half, it's pretty strange to me that there is hardly any conversation about the current bill that could very well improve things quite a bit that republicans, who never shut up about the issue, are about to kill for purely political purposes.
Nobody wants to talk about how full of shit that party is?
I mean if immigration is important to you, where is the outrage over the one party that is suddenly disinclined to do anything about the issue they claim to care about most?
Yeah… the silence about the GOP Border “Crisis” is deafening, both here and in the real world.
I brought it up a couple pages ago...didn't get any traction. Instead, let's all be hyper focused on an isolated incident in New York or something. Not saying that is not a horrible thing because it is....
..BUT THERE IS FINALLY BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION that one party is just completely ignoring solely because Donald Trump told them to. A possible solution to this problem is literally within reach and the republicans are saying "nah, we're just going to continue to complain about it and blame the party who attempted to fix the issue."
And you know what? Because they are so good at messaging to their mindless base, their side of the argument will likely win over the American people. This thread is a nice little microcosm of what is happening in this country right now. lol. Biden is getting blown out of the water on this issue, yet I bet the vast majority of the people who just blindly blame him and the democrats are not even fucking aware of what is happening this week.
Talk about dereliction of duty. These nimrods are attempting to impeach the Director of Homeland Security for failing to secure the border WHILE THEY ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM A BILL THAT IS LITERALLY DESIGNED TO DO JUST THAT.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
Taxes and spending. We spend too much, particularly on the IRS and programs for the others. And how that $2 tax break per week on your paycheck is so great that you won’t be bothered by that 9% tax break for corporations or high investment earners because buying a 4th house creates jobs.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
Yeah, the both sides stuff is bullshit. I look at this like gun control. The democrats have been forced to compromise the shit out of every gun control legislation that's ever become law...much to the consternation of rational people who realize they never go far enough. But, unfortunately, change never happens overnight so you take what you can get.
This bill, in comparison, seems to go way further in advancing the other side's agenda yet those mother fuckers are refusing to do anything about it.
There is no both sides with maga. I'm sick of people twisting themselves into pretzel trying to make those disingenuous arguments.
Good...but you know what? How about a fucking Oval Office address? Something the networks all carry? If both sides now agree this is a pressing issue, having a press conference in the middle of the day that not many people will notice isn't giving me a ton of confidence the dems know how to take the offensive here. Hope I am wrong....
Biden gets handed an immigration policy opening from the GOP. Can he take it?
Not everyone in the party is confident in the White House’s ability to turn lemons into lemonade.
President Joe Biden arrives to speak on the bipartisan border bill in the White House State Dining Room, on Feb. 6, 2024. | Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images
President Joe Biden pledged Tuesday to make Republicans pay politically for torpedoing a bipartisan Senate deal meant to address the migrant crisis at the southern border.
Democrats are hopeful — but not entirely confident — he has the political chops to do so.
Across the party, there was a sense that Republicans had handed them the political equivalent of a life raft. Having insisted that Democrats agree to tough new measures to curb migration in exchange for Ukraine aid, Senate Republicans promised to kill the legislative deal that had resulted from that demand.
Biden wasted little time. Before cameras at the White House on Tuesday, he promised to take the GOP opposition to the bill “to the country” and blamed his likely general election opponent, Donald Trump, for masterminding the death of the deal to keep the border as an active campaign issue.
Democrats followed suit, echoing Biden’s message — and urging him to deliver it with uncharacteristic force.
The president should “go to the border, stand there and say, ‘We have a crisis that I can’t fix by executive order. You have to give me the authority. Here is the bill,’” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a close Biden ally. “He should stand there and say there is a way to fix this and it’s languishing on the Senate floor because Republicans don’t want to fix the problem.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said Democrats need “to focus like a laser beam on the fact that Republicans, for totally political purposes, destroyed a bipartisan border deal.”
“What you have here is the sad fact that too many Republicans have subcontracted out their vote to Donald Trump,” he added. “I mean, that’s how you have a situation where they declare a bill dead before they’ve even read it.”
The White House plans to seek out opportunities to talk about the issue in the future, according to an administration official. Administration officials felt buoyed by the breadth of support for the legislation, including the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the National Border Patrol Council, the border patrol agent union that is aligned with former President Trump.
But while Democrats privately agreed that they’d been gifted a political opening, not everyone was confident in the capacity to exploit it. Many stressed that it would take a sustained White House effort to make the public believe that Republicans were responsible for a situation on the border with a Democrat in the White House.
Biden: GOP should ‘show some spine’ on border deal
Share
Play Video
“I don’t know how you avoid the conclusion that [Republicans are] really not interested in solving the problem at the border. They’re interested in maintaining an electoral issue,” said Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). Yet, “it remains to be seen whether that can be communicated effectively.”
Speeches and utterances at campaign rallies would be insufficient, Democrats warned. Biden would “really have to elevate it and hammer it home,” as Jim Manley, a top aide to former Majority Leader Harry Reid, put it. “Because these guys, through sheer incompetence, have given Democrats a fantastic selling point.”
Asked if Biden had shown the ability to do that, Manley took a second to weigh his response. “Not necessarily,” he replied.
Immigration reform advocates sympathetic to the White House, meanwhile, worried the president would not couple whatever rhetorical move he made to make Trump pay politically with substantive action to address the border crisis. They argued that the White House had effectively been given a green light by Republicans to pursue executive actions on a host of fronts, and that they needed to promptly do so.
“I really worry they think they can politic their way out of this issue,” said one top advocate, who was granted anonymity to candidly assess White House operations. “But on the margins of this they have failed to transform an immigration system. They now have to have a policy agenda.”
That Democrats even found themselves in a place to debate how best to turn the issue of migration into a political advantage was, itself, a testament to the chaotic developments on the Hill over the past few days.
Having spent months in intense negotiations, Senate lawmakers unveiled a deal late Sunday that would have increased resources to border agents, tightened standards for asylum claims, added work permits and set standards at which the border would largely be closed down.
Trump told Republicans to kill the measure, arguing the deal would diminish an effective campaign issue and that they could secure a better one with him in the Oval Office. While Republican skepticism to the bill was already circulating, GOP lawmakers fell in line. Some rank-and-file House Republicans publicly said they would oppose the plan, even before it was released, in an attempt to preserve it as a political issue. Their common refrain was that the Biden White House created the current crisis and already possessed the tools to solve it.
Immigration policy experts say there are steps that Biden can now take. Some would be welcomed by conservatives, such as moving more personnel and other resources to the border and processing centers along with tightening asylum eligibility. But many options would leave them howling.
Among the executive actions outlined by advocates was the use of executive authorities to expand pathways for humanitarian parole, scale up refugee programs and broaden work permits. Biden, they argued, could also take actions to provide more protections for so-called Dreamers and create new eligibility designations for temporary protective status.
MOST READ
The overarching idea would be to divert migration away from the southern border into more manageable avenues. And Democrats said Biden should take such actions even if it risks exposing him to GOP claims that he already had the power to act.
“The president should use every bit of executive authority that exists now and press for continued efforts to reform a broken immigration system,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).
Republicans, for their part, said they were nonplussed about Biden’s threat to turn the issue on them. They expressed disbelief that the president could gain any advantage on securing the border after having been dogged by the issue since the onset of his presidency.
“He should try that,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “I’d like to see him get out to explain some things — right after he talks to Ronald Reagan, you know.”
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
You know Faux News and the other MAGA outlets are playing this on a loop while all of their talking heads speak endlessly about the crisis on the border throughout the day and night, 24/7, expressing faux outrage. You know this, right? It doesn't need to happen "again," for once, played on a loop, makes it a crisis.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
Yeah, this incident is a gift to the GOP and red meat for the anti-immigrant movement. If people are talking about this then they aren’t talking about the fact that the GOP won’t fix the border because it’s too important for riling up their base during election years.
We also aren’t talking about how the GOP is wasting time and tax dollars on a doomed-from-the-start purely performative impeachment of the secretary of homeland security for… not doing enough about immigration.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
I said in my first post it’s it’s a criminal system issue too. It’s not the migrant part that frustrates me, it’s the zero accountability that does. This trend of release without bail is ridiculous. I only bring up the migrant part because as an undocumented immigrant, you know there is about a 0.0001% chance they’ll show, so I don’t understand the reasoning behind it.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
it has been a both sides issue for decades…but not since 2016ish for sure. I think I’ve been very clear as to when I think it was a both sides issue vs what it has devolved into.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
it has been a both sides issue for decades…but not since 2016ish for sure. I think I’ve been very clear as to when I think it was a both sides issue vs what it has devolved into.
I don’t recall the delineation being made between modern day and years’ past… I recall (more or less) saying this issue is too important for the GOP as it rallies their base to the polls, and someone pushed back saying it rallies both sides to the polls, not just the right. If that was meant historically as opposed to modern day, I missed that angle to it.
& in fairness, conservatives have been fear mongering about immigrants from the south since the reconstruction era… have democrats ever made immigration their platform like the GOP has? I ask that in good faith… I’m unaware of how democrats have platformed the immigration issue in elections past.
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
it has been a both sides issue for decades…but not since 2016ish for sure. I think I’ve been very clear as to when I think it was a both sides issue vs what it has devolved into.
I don’t recall the delineation being made between modern day and years’ past… I recall (more or less) saying this issue is too important for the GOP as it rallies their base to the polls, and someone pushed back saying it rallies both sides to the polls, not just the right. If that was meant historically as opposed to modern day, I missed that angle to it.
& in fairness, conservatives have been fear mongering about immigrants from the south since the reconstruction era… have democrats ever made immigration their platform like the GOP has? I ask that in good faith… I’m unaware of how democrats have platformed the immigration issue in elections past.
I may not have been clear in the singular post. I do think both sides have enjoyed using it to get people to the polls....but it is also true, and I certainly have stated plenty of times in this thread that this current version of the GOP has 0 interest in actually doing anything while the Dems are working on solutions.
My belief is the GOP uses it to drive voters who are afraid to the polls. The Dems have used it as an issue to attempt to gain voters in the ever growing Latino population. But there was a shift in the GOP that resulted in a do nothing party when they don't control everything. Awful.
And then you have this crap (FB post on a local "uncensored" page) from my area...he watched a middleman fire his employees? How long was he standing around to witness that?
This is your typical tRump voter. Couldn't pass a third grade spelling test.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Yeah, as recently as the last couple of weeks someone was complaining in another thread about Biden wanting to “flood the nation w/ illegals” which is not only complete f’ing irrational and conspiratorial nonsense but also has roots in the white nationalist great replacement theory.
I read somewhere that if this law was currently in place, the border would have been shut for months since the number exceed 5k a day a long time ago. You'd think republicans would want to close our borders, right? Guess not. lol
I said as much here about a month ago, the issue is too important at election time for the GOP to want to fix. It was countered as being a both sides issue IIRC, which I still don’t get.
Fixing immigration is literally the GOP platform; they CAN’T fix it, what else would they run on? Law & order?
it has been a both sides issue for decades…but not since 2016ish for sure. I think I’ve been very clear as to when I think it was a both sides issue vs what it has devolved into.
I don’t recall the delineation being made between modern day and years’ past… I recall (more or less) saying this issue is too important for the GOP as it rallies their base to the polls, and someone pushed back saying it rallies both sides to the polls, not just the right. If that was meant historically as opposed to modern day, I missed that angle to it.
& in fairness, conservatives have been fear mongering about immigrants from the south since the reconstruction era… have democrats ever made immigration their platform like the GOP has? I ask that in good faith… I’m unaware of how democrats have platformed the immigration issue in elections past.
I may not have been clear in the singular post. I do think both sides have enjoyed using it to get people to the polls....but it is also true, and I certainly have stated plenty of times in this thread that this current version of the GOP has 0 interest in actually doing anything while the Dems are working on solutions.
My belief is the GOP uses it to drive voters who are afraid to the polls. The Dems have used it as an issue to attempt to gain voters in the ever growing Latino population. But there was a shift in the GOP that resulted in a do nothing party when they don't control everything. Awful.
Yeah, I suppose the Dreamers issue was one that democrats have used, but I still think we're talking apples & oranges in regards to how each party has platformed the issue, even historically.
It's never been the hot button topic on the left that it's been on the right, and for the exact reason you specified: fear.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
I said in my first post it’s it’s a criminal system issue too. It’s not the migrant part that frustrates me, it’s the zero accountability that does. This trend of release without bail is ridiculous. I only bring up the migrant part because as an undocumented immigrant, you know there is about a 0.0001% chance they’ll show, so I don’t understand the reasoning behind it.
not for sure on all the rules, but I am fairly certain there's a rule that it's like immediate deportation if there's a criminal offense for those seeking Asylum. And that wouldn't be handled by a local jurisdiction that would be handled by INS
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Has there been a statement made by the da explaining the rationale behind the decision? And what was the exact charge, what degree of assault or was it something along the lines of simple assault Etc. That's the kind of thing that would factor into whether or not bill was requested or not, right?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Has there been a statement made by the da explaining the rationale behind the decision? And what was the exact charge, what degree of assault or was it something along the lines of simple assault Etc. That's the kind of thing that would factor into whether or not bill was requested or not, right?
The original article posted has quotes from the DA, governor, police union. Even mentions how “release without bail” has reduced repeat offenders and how this particular incident is a rarity. But you know, fauxrage because of the “other.”
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
Yeah, this incident is a gift to the GOP and red meat for the anti-immigrant movement. If people are talking about this then they aren’t talking about the fact that the GOP won’t fix the border because it’s too important for riling up their base during election years.
We also aren’t talking about how the GOP is wasting time and tax dollars on a doomed-from-the-start purely performative impeachment of the secretary of homeland security for… not doing enough about immigration.
EXACTLY. If the roles were reversed this would be the exact kind of situation where the maga's would be saying this is a psyop or these are crisis actors or some bullshit.
Hannity had that douchebag Guardian Angel douchebag guy on last night and his crew beat up some immigrant behind him on live television. Literally anything they can do to distract their viewers from the real issue at hand....they're gonna do it. And it will work because these people eat this shit up like it's all their last meal on earth or something.
I was going to post that and decided not to. It's a bad look for sure.
Thankfully this is an isolated incident. If more things like this happen the cops will make it hell for them.
Isolated yes. The fact that they weren't back in their home country within 24 hours is ridiculous...let alone no bail for attacking a police officer.
No bail for attacking a police officer is great until a police officer lies about being attacked.
Are you speaking from the hip here? There is film footage of 12 people kicking and punching at the cops...
I take back what I said and like Cincy, send em back.
I’m speaking about a general policy which is what I inferred from Cincy’s comment.
I’m all for deporting criminal immigrants, but as I understand it, the 6th amendment applies to non-citizens as well as citizens, so there still has to be due process.
I am a bit confused by your statement. If you are saying don't just immediately deport....I can see that, I disagree, but I understand. If you are saying setting bail for people that attack cops isn't ok....I wouldn't agree. It's the bare minimum that can be done.
DA stated they didnt have enough evidence. and they were released. fingerprinted and photos. have since left or are on their way to leave the country.
Their info plugged into immigration system prevents them from claiming asylum again at a minimum. as more video evidence is collected, the bench warrant should be enough to mean holding whereever they may make contact with police or border patrol......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Has there been a statement made by the da explaining the rationale behind the decision? And what was the exact charge, what degree of assault or was it something along the lines of simple assault Etc. That's the kind of thing that would factor into whether or not bill was requested or not, right?
The original article posted has quotes from the DA, governor, police union. Even mentions how “release without bail” has reduced repeat offenders and how this particular incident is a rarity. But you know, fauxrage because of the “other.”
In that same article, the chief seems to contradict the DA and states "This was a bail eligible offense, why bail wasn't asked for, we don't have an answer for that, but the judge also had an opportunity to step in and remand them to Rikers -- now these four are on a bus, the whole system needs to be looked at," said Chief of Patrol John Chell. Also, I disagree with the DA that it is working. I've never heard repeat offenders are down, but even if it is, major crime overall is way up. So maybe more people are seeing it as a free pass on your first offense, get their one freebie and don't repeat? Is repeat offenders only down because first time offenders are up, and second time offenders are the same? That might actually be the case, I'm not sure how else you get overall crime up but repeat offenders down. That's not a stat I'd be bragging about. They claimed to have more video that what has been shown on the media, so I'm not sure what more evidence they thought they needed to offer bail. The only one they decided was bail worthy was the original offender who resisted arrest and started it. I think running up and blind-siding a cop with a foot to the face is deserving too.
You believe in letting accused rapists and murderers roam free until after the trial and verdict? Based on your comment it would seem that you do.
guess it begins with due process, and what you know the reason for bail to be in theory.
and no. to your off base assumptions.
and based off your statement I can reasonably infer you do not believe in the premise of innocent until proven guilty.....
your statement quite clearly suggests punishment(penalty) prior to conviction.
No, I don’t believe in punishment prior to conviction for the majority of cases. I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show. An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police. Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
one thing I havent seen said is what exactly this guy did ? just shoved the cop? punched? kicked, whatever.
all these and other more minor contact are considered assault.
Yeah, I said he assaulted a cop. You just said punching and shoving are considered assault. I’m not sure what your question is. The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it. Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Why not? Seems as if the republicans, who talk nonstop about instances like this, are ignoring and brushing off the broader issue of immigration right at this very moment in lieu of moving forward with a bipartisan bill that could actually do a lot to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
Yeah, this incident is a gift to the GOP and red meat for the anti-immigrant movement. If people are talking about this then they aren’t talking about the fact that the GOP won’t fix the border because it’s too important for riling up their base during election years.
We also aren’t talking about how the GOP is wasting time and tax dollars on a doomed-from-the-start purely performative impeachment of the secretary of homeland security for… not doing enough about immigration.
EXACTLY. If the roles were reversed this would be the exact kind of situation where the maga's would be saying this is a psyop or these are crisis actors or some bullshit.
Hannity had that douchebag Guardian Angel douchebag guy on last night and his crew beat up some immigrant behind him on live television. Literally anything they can do to distract their viewers from the real issue at hand....they're gonna do it. And it will work because these people eat this shit up like it's all their last meal on earth or something.
Of course it works.
It wasn’t that long ago people were making excuses for the MAGA’s who attacked the CPD on 1/6. They blamed antfa, crisis actors, George Floyd, Nancy Pelosi, more recently Nikki Haley - everyone under the sun except trump and the people who answered his call. Those being held are referred to as hostages by some of the GOP. Funny how that works…
I just saw that Hannity clip, it was something else… I like how he referred to them as ‘Biden’s undocumented immigrants’ (or something to that effect ) as if Biden’s the one refusing to fix the problem, not the GOP.
I also like how they brought up the veteran angle to ramp up resentment of the immigrants. They’re doing everything they can to drum up the hysteria and to what end? There’s a historical precedent to dehumanizing large groups of people for those who want to acknowledge it, and it’s not a good one.
Behind the border mess: Open GOP rebellion against McConnell
The Republican leader told POLITICO that his critics “had their shot” already. But conservatives are not done whacking him over the immigration-for-Ukraine aid implosion.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) speaks during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 6, 2024. | Francis Chung/POLITICO
Conservative hardliners once celebrated Mitch McConnell for wrestling the federal judiciary to the right and thwarting progressive hopes.
Now he is under open attack from the right for even trying to work with Democrats on the border.
The Senate GOP leader is facing internal resistance not seen in more than a year as Republicans descend into discord over two issues they once demanded be linked: border security and the war in Ukraine.
McConnell, now nearing his 82nd birthday, is determined to fund the Ukrainian war effort, a push his allies have depicted as legacy-defining. But now that his party is set on Wednesday to reject a bipartisan trade of tougher border policies for war funding, his far-right critics are speaking out more loudly: Several held a press conference Tuesday where they denounced his handling of the border talks, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) calling on McConnell to step down.
In an interview, McConnell rejected the criticism and said his antagonists fail to recognize the reality of divided government.
“I’ve had a small group of persistent critics the whole time I’ve been in this job. They had their shot,” McConnell said, referring to Sen. Rick Scott’s (R-Fla.) challenge to his leadership in 2022.
“The reason we’ve been talking about the border is because they wanted to, the persistent critics,” he added. “You can’t pass a bill without dealing with a Democratic president and a Democratic Senate.”
McConnell admits defeat: Border deal 'will not become law'
Share
Play Video
Despite that pragmatism, McConnell’s job is only getting harder. If he runs for another term in leadership next year, a tougher fight than Scott gave him seems almost inevitable.
That is in part because of Donald Trump, whom McConnell barely acknowledges after criticizing his role in the Capitol riot of Jan. 6, 2021. The former president played a leading role in killing the border deal and has called consistently for McConnell’s ouster. And at this time next year, Trump could well be back in the White House.
More and more of Senate Republicans’ internal strife is seeping out into public view, exposing years-old beefs that are still simmering. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) posted a fundraising link asking donors to “kill this border bill” in the middle of a closed-door GOP meeting on Monday and demanded “new leadership,” while Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) memed McConnell as Charlie Brown whiffing on an attempt to kick a football held by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.).
“I’ve been super unhappy since this started,” Johnson said in an interview. “Leader McConnell completely blew this.”
Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson helped squash the border bill’s prospects in the House while Ron Johnson, Lee, Cruz, Vance and Scott pummeled it on TV and social media. The intensity of that assault turned many GOP senators sour on a border security deal that would have amounted to the most conservative immigration bill backed by a Democratic president in a generation — a bill they once said was the key to unlocking Ukraine aid.
Though McConnell touted the work of Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) and the bill’s endorsement by the Border Patrol union, he conceded what was obvious by Monday night: This legislation is dead.
“The reason we ended up where we are is the members decided, since it was never going to become law, they didn’t want to deal with it,” McConnell said in the interview. “I don’t know who is at fault here, in terms of trying to cast public blame.”
At Tuesday’s party meeting, Cruz told McConnell that the border deal was indefensible, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) questioned why the GOP would walk away from it, according to two people familiar with the meeting. That followed a Monday evening private meeting where Johnson got into a near-shouting match with Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), one of several senators who has tried to rebut Trump’s influence on the party.
Young played down the spat afterward: “Ron and I have a very good relationship. We can be very candid with one another.”
McConnell’s loud critics are among those most responsible for raising opposition to the border deal, attacking its provisions while the text was being finalized. They raised such a ruckus that none of McConnell’s potential successors as leader — Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and John Thune (R-S.D.) — offered to support it.
McConnell can’t be ejected spontaneously like a House speaker, meaning his job is safe until the end of the year. He also has major sway over the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC that may have to help Cruz, Scott and other Republicans win reelection.
And McConnell is not without defenders. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said any attempt to blame McConnell for the border crackup is “a bit misplaced.”
Indeed, McConnell was OK with just approving foreign aid back in the fall, but agreed to link it to border security after rank-and-file Republicans grew eager to extract concessions from Democrats in order to get Ukraine money.
“It’s not James’ fault, he did the best he could under the circumstances. It’s not Mitch’s fault,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.).
The historical record holds plenty of quotes from McConnell’s current critics asking for stronger border policy during the Trump administration. Many of them now have since changed their tune to say Biden doesn’t need new laws at all to enforce border security.
“We all wanted to see border security. And I think a lot of our members were demanding that in exchange for the rest of the funding. That’s an issue our conference needs to be aware of,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), the No. 4 leader. “The conference wanted border security.”
The animosity McConnell now faces from Ron Johnson, Lee and others isn’t new either: They’ve questioned Senate GOP leadership’s decisions for years.
Ron Johnson’s long been a thorn in McConnell’s side for years, particular after many Republicans abandoned his reelection bid in 2016. Cruz has sparred with McConnell since getting to the Senate in 2013, Lee frequently breaks with leadership and a number of newer GOP senators voted for Scott over McConnell in 2022.
One GOP senator, granted anonymity to assess the situation candidly, said that the new wave of attacks could be happening because McConnell’s opponents sense weakness — or just out of “personal pique” over years-old disagreements.
Dems, GOP rage as border deal collapses
Share
Play Video
“For three months it’s been nothing but border and Ukraine, border and Ukraine, border and Ukraine. I don’t know how many speeches I’ve heard … and now all of a sudden, it’s: ‘We’re not going to do that,’” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), another of the McConnell critics. “It just seems like total chaos to me.”
Either way, the 180 among many Republicans is evidence of a major drift away from McConnell’s style of Republicanism and toward Trump’s. McConnell hasn’t talked to Trump since the Jan. 6 riot and tried to turn the party in a surprisingly deal-centric direction during the first two years of President Joe Biden’s presidency.
Just two years ago, debt ceiling increases, gun safety and infrastructure laws passed with McConnell’s blessing — all a reflection of his view that protecting the filibuster requires working with Democrats on bipartisan bills.
Now the reality is that Trump, the likely nominee, doesn’t want a deal that Republicans set out to secure four months ago. Deal-making without Trump’s blessing appears impossible, and that’s a challenging dynamic for the longtime GOP leader.
“This wasn’t good for him. This wasn’t good for any of us,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) of McConnell, whom he backed in 2022. “And I’m not gonna say he’s the total cause of it, but we got to have a better plan. This didn’t work out for us.”
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I explained how bail is supposed to work. It’s collateral to allow you to continue to work and live while the process is ongoing. The bail is supposed to consider factors of flight risk, means, seriousness of crime, danger to society, etc. Only in cases where the defendant poses a risk to society should bail be denied. If you’re a big flight risk, but not a danger, bail should reflect that to guarantee you show.
An undocumented immigrant who can disappear with no ties to the community is about as big of a flight risk as you can get. Release without bail is ridiculous. Especially considering they were on video committing the crime. If you cannot afford the set bail, then here’s an idea. Don’t come to a country illegally, take advantage of the free housing given to you and beat up police.
Releasing them without any sort of accountability is a joke.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
..BUT THERE IS FINALLY BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION that one party is just completely ignoring solely because Donald Trump told them to. A possible solution to this problem is literally within reach and the republicans are saying "nah, we're just going to continue to complain about it and blame the party who attempted to fix the issue."
And you know what? Because they are so good at messaging to their mindless base, their side of the argument will likely win over the American people. This thread is a nice little microcosm of what is happening in this country right now. lol. Biden is getting blown out of the water on this issue, yet I bet the vast majority of the people who just blindly blame him and the democrats are not even fucking aware of what is happening this week.
Talk about dereliction of duty. These nimrods are attempting to impeach the Director of Homeland Security for failing to secure the border WHILE THEY ARE RUNNING AWAY FROM A BILL THAT IS LITERALLY DESIGNED TO DO JUST THAT.
Fucking disingenuous assholes. All of them.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
This bill, in comparison, seems to go way further in advancing the other side's agenda yet those mother fuckers are refusing to do anything about it.
There is no both sides with maga. I'm sick of people twisting themselves into pretzel trying to make those disingenuous arguments.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/06/biden-immigration-policy-border-republicans-00139966
Biden gets handed an immigration policy opening from the GOP. Can he take it?
Not everyone in the party is confident in the White House’s ability to turn lemons into lemonade.
President Joe Biden arrives to speak on the bipartisan border bill in the White House State Dining Room, on Feb. 6, 2024. | Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images
By JENNIFER HABERKORN and SAM STEIN
02/06/2024 05:56 PM EST
President Joe Biden pledged Tuesday to make Republicans pay politically for torpedoing a bipartisan Senate deal meant to address the migrant crisis at the southern border.
Democrats are hopeful — but not entirely confident — he has the political chops to do so.
Across the party, there was a sense that Republicans had handed them the political equivalent of a life raft. Having insisted that Democrats agree to tough new measures to curb migration in exchange for Ukraine aid, Senate Republicans promised to kill the legislative deal that had resulted from that demand.
Biden wasted little time. Before cameras at the White House on Tuesday, he promised to take the GOP opposition to the bill “to the country” and blamed his likely general election opponent, Donald Trump, for masterminding the death of the deal to keep the border as an active campaign issue.
Democrats followed suit, echoing Biden’s message — and urging him to deliver it with uncharacteristic force.
The president should “go to the border, stand there and say, ‘We have a crisis that I can’t fix by executive order. You have to give me the authority. Here is the bill,’” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), a close Biden ally. “He should stand there and say there is a way to fix this and it’s languishing on the Senate floor because Republicans don’t want to fix the problem.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said Democrats need “to focus like a laser beam on the fact that Republicans, for totally political purposes, destroyed a bipartisan border deal.”
“What you have here is the sad fact that too many Republicans have subcontracted out their vote to Donald Trump,” he added. “I mean, that’s how you have a situation where they declare a bill dead before they’ve even read it.”
The White House plans to seek out opportunities to talk about the issue in the future, according to an administration official. Administration officials felt buoyed by the breadth of support for the legislation, including the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the National Border Patrol Council, the border patrol agent union that is aligned with former President Trump.
But while Democrats privately agreed that they’d been gifted a political opening, not everyone was confident in the capacity to exploit it. Many stressed that it would take a sustained White House effort to make the public believe that Republicans were responsible for a situation on the border with a Democrat in the White House.
“I don’t know how you avoid the conclusion that [Republicans are] really not interested in solving the problem at the border. They’re interested in maintaining an electoral issue,” said Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). Yet, “it remains to be seen whether that can be communicated effectively.”
Speeches and utterances at campaign rallies would be insufficient, Democrats warned. Biden would “really have to elevate it and hammer it home,” as Jim Manley, a top aide to former Majority Leader Harry Reid, put it. “Because these guys, through sheer incompetence, have given Democrats a fantastic selling point.”
Asked if Biden had shown the ability to do that, Manley took a second to weigh his response. “Not necessarily,” he replied.
Immigration reform advocates sympathetic to the White House, meanwhile, worried the president would not couple whatever rhetorical move he made to make Trump pay politically with substantive action to address the border crisis. They argued that the White House had effectively been given a green light by Republicans to pursue executive actions on a host of fronts, and that they needed to promptly do so.
“I really worry they think they can politic their way out of this issue,” said one top advocate, who was granted anonymity to candidly assess White House operations. “But on the margins of this they have failed to transform an immigration system. They now have to have a policy agenda.”
That Democrats even found themselves in a place to debate how best to turn the issue of migration into a political advantage was, itself, a testament to the chaotic developments on the Hill over the past few days.
Having spent months in intense negotiations, Senate lawmakers unveiled a deal late Sunday that would have increased resources to border agents, tightened standards for asylum claims, added work permits and set standards at which the border would largely be closed down.
Trump told Republicans to kill the measure, arguing the deal would diminish an effective campaign issue and that they could secure a better one with him in the Oval Office. While Republican skepticism to the bill was already circulating, GOP lawmakers fell in line. Some rank-and-file House Republicans publicly said they would oppose the plan, even before it was released, in an attempt to preserve it as a political issue. Their common refrain was that the Biden White House created the current crisis and already possessed the tools to solve it.
Immigration policy experts say there are steps that Biden can now take. Some would be welcomed by conservatives, such as moving more personnel and other resources to the border and processing centers along with tightening asylum eligibility. But many options would leave them howling.
Among the executive actions outlined by advocates was the use of executive authorities to expand pathways for humanitarian parole, scale up refugee programs and broaden work permits. Biden, they argued, could also take actions to provide more protections for so-called Dreamers and create new eligibility designations for temporary protective status.
MOST READ
The overarching idea would be to divert migration away from the southern border into more manageable avenues. And Democrats said Biden should take such actions even if it risks exposing him to GOP claims that he already had the power to act.
“The president should use every bit of executive authority that exists now and press for continued efforts to reform a broken immigration system,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).
Republicans, for their part, said they were nonplussed about Biden’s threat to turn the issue on them. They expressed disbelief that the president could gain any advantage on securing the border after having been dogged by the issue since the onset of his presidency.
“He should try that,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “I’d like to see him get out to explain some things — right after he talks to Ronald Reagan, you know.”
The video shows several different indicates running up and kicking or punching a cop when he’s down. There’s no excuse, please don’t try to minimize it.
Punching and kicking police, especially when they’re already down on the ground being attacked, shouldn’t be ignored or brushed off as no big deal.
Perhaps, now hear me out now, they love seeing immigrants attack police, especially in blue cities. They fucking live for it. In fact they would love nothing more than for things like this to happen over and over and over again so folks of a similar mindset to yours would just get more riled up and conveniently ignore the fact that the very people who are riling you up are literally choosing NOT to solve the problem in the first place.
If you really cared this much about immigration, I'd think you be better served diverting your attention away from this shiny object and over to the real issue at hand.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
& in fairness, conservatives have been fear mongering about immigrants from the south since the reconstruction era… have democrats ever made immigration their platform like the GOP has? I ask that in good faith… I’m unaware of how democrats have platformed the immigration issue in elections past.
My belief is the GOP uses it to drive voters who are afraid to the polls. The Dems have used it as an issue to attempt to gain voters in the ever growing Latino population. But there was a shift in the GOP that resulted in a do nothing party when they don't control everything. Awful.
And then you have this crap (FB post on a local "uncensored" page) from my area...he watched a middleman fire his employees? How long was he standing around to witness that?
This is your typical tRump voter. Couldn't pass a third grade spelling test.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
It's never been the hot button topic on the left that it's been on the right, and for the exact reason you specified: fear.
not for sure on all the rules, but I am fairly certain there's a rule that it's like immediate deportation if there's a criminal offense for those seeking Asylum. And that wouldn't be handled by a local jurisdiction that would be handled by INS
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Hannity had that douchebag Guardian Angel douchebag guy on last night and his crew beat up some immigrant behind him on live television. Literally anything they can do to distract their viewers from the real issue at hand....they're gonna do it. And it will work because these people eat this shit up like it's all their last meal on earth or something.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Also, I disagree with the DA that it is working. I've never heard repeat offenders are down, but even if it is, major crime overall is way up. So maybe more people are seeing it as a free pass on your first offense, get their one freebie and don't repeat? Is repeat offenders only down because first time offenders are up, and second time offenders are the same? That might actually be the case, I'm not sure how else you get overall crime up but repeat offenders down. That's not a stat I'd be bragging about.
They claimed to have more video that what has been shown on the media, so I'm not sure what more evidence they thought they needed to offer bail. The only one they decided was bail worthy was the original offender who resisted arrest and started it. I think running up and blind-siding a cop with a foot to the face is deserving too.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/07/mcconnell-gop-rebellion-border-deal-00139972
Behind the border mess: Open GOP rebellion against McConnell
The Republican leader told POLITICO that his critics “had their shot” already. But conservatives are not done whacking him over the immigration-for-Ukraine aid implosion.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) speaks during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 6, 2024. | Francis Chung/POLITICO
Conservative hardliners once celebrated Mitch McConnell for wrestling the federal judiciary to the right and thwarting progressive hopes.
Now he is under open attack from the right for even trying to work with Democrats on the border.
The Senate GOP leader is facing internal resistance not seen in more than a year as Republicans descend into discord over two issues they once demanded be linked: border security and the war in Ukraine.
McConnell, now nearing his 82nd birthday, is determined to fund the Ukrainian war effort, a push his allies have depicted as legacy-defining. But now that his party is set on Wednesday to reject a bipartisan trade of tougher border policies for war funding, his far-right critics are speaking out more loudly: Several held a press conference Tuesday where they denounced his handling of the border talks, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) calling on McConnell to step down.
In an interview, McConnell rejected the criticism and said his antagonists fail to recognize the reality of divided government.
“I’ve had a small group of persistent critics the whole time I’ve been in this job. They had their shot,” McConnell said, referring to Sen. Rick Scott’s (R-Fla.) challenge to his leadership in 2022.
“The reason we’ve been talking about the border is because they wanted to, the persistent critics,” he added. “You can’t pass a bill without dealing with a Democratic president and a Democratic Senate.”
Despite that pragmatism, McConnell’s job is only getting harder. If he runs for another term in leadership next year, a tougher fight than Scott gave him seems almost inevitable.
That is in part because of Donald Trump, whom McConnell barely acknowledges after criticizing his role in the Capitol riot of Jan. 6, 2021. The former president played a leading role in killing the border deal and has called consistently for McConnell’s ouster. And at this time next year, Trump could well be back in the White House.
More and more of Senate Republicans’ internal strife is seeping out into public view, exposing years-old beefs that are still simmering. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) posted a fundraising link asking donors to “kill this border bill” in the middle of a closed-door GOP meeting on Monday and demanded “new leadership,” while Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) memed McConnell as Charlie Brown whiffing on an attempt to kick a football held by Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.).
“I’ve been super unhappy since this started,” Johnson said in an interview. “Leader McConnell completely blew this.”
Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson helped squash the border bill’s prospects in the House while Ron Johnson, Lee, Cruz, Vance and Scott pummeled it on TV and social media. The intensity of that assault turned many GOP senators sour on a border security deal that would have amounted to the most conservative immigration bill backed by a Democratic president in a generation — a bill they once said was the key to unlocking Ukraine aid.
Though McConnell touted the work of Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) and the bill’s endorsement by the Border Patrol union, he conceded what was obvious by Monday night: This legislation is dead.
“The reason we ended up where we are is the members decided, since it was never going to become law, they didn’t want to deal with it,” McConnell said in the interview. “I don’t know who is at fault here, in terms of trying to cast public blame.”
At Tuesday’s party meeting, Cruz told McConnell that the border deal was indefensible, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) questioned why the GOP would walk away from it, according to two people familiar with the meeting. That followed a Monday evening private meeting where Johnson got into a near-shouting match with Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), one of several senators who has tried to rebut Trump’s influence on the party.
Young played down the spat afterward: “Ron and I have a very good relationship. We can be very candid with one another.”
McConnell’s loud critics are among those most responsible for raising opposition to the border deal, attacking its provisions while the text was being finalized. They raised such a ruckus that none of McConnell’s potential successors as leader — Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), John Cornyn (R-Texas) and John Thune (R-S.D.) — offered to support it.
McConnell can’t be ejected spontaneously like a House speaker, meaning his job is safe until the end of the year. He also has major sway over the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC that may have to help Cruz, Scott and other Republicans win reelection.
And McConnell is not without defenders. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said any attempt to blame McConnell for the border crackup is “a bit misplaced.”
Indeed, McConnell was OK with just approving foreign aid back in the fall, but agreed to link it to border security after rank-and-file Republicans grew eager to extract concessions from Democrats in order to get Ukraine money.
“It’s not James’ fault, he did the best he could under the circumstances. It’s not Mitch’s fault,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.).
The historical record holds plenty of quotes from McConnell’s current critics asking for stronger border policy during the Trump administration. Many of them now have since changed their tune to say Biden doesn’t need new laws at all to enforce border security.
“We all wanted to see border security. And I think a lot of our members were demanding that in exchange for the rest of the funding. That’s an issue our conference needs to be aware of,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), the No. 4 leader. “The conference wanted border security.”
The animosity McConnell now faces from Ron Johnson, Lee and others isn’t new either: They’ve questioned Senate GOP leadership’s decisions for years.
Ron Johnson’s long been a thorn in McConnell’s side for years, particular after many Republicans abandoned his reelection bid in 2016. Cruz has sparred with McConnell since getting to the Senate in 2013, Lee frequently breaks with leadership and a number of newer GOP senators voted for Scott over McConnell in 2022.
One GOP senator, granted anonymity to assess the situation candidly, said that the new wave of attacks could be happening because McConnell’s opponents sense weakness — or just out of “personal pique” over years-old disagreements.
“For three months it’s been nothing but border and Ukraine, border and Ukraine, border and Ukraine. I don’t know how many speeches I’ve heard … and now all of a sudden, it’s: ‘We’re not going to do that,’” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), another of the McConnell critics. “It just seems like total chaos to me.”
Either way, the 180 among many Republicans is evidence of a major drift away from McConnell’s style of Republicanism and toward Trump’s. McConnell hasn’t talked to Trump since the Jan. 6 riot and tried to turn the party in a surprisingly deal-centric direction during the first two years of President Joe Biden’s presidency.
Just two years ago, debt ceiling increases, gun safety and infrastructure laws passed with McConnell’s blessing — all a reflection of his view that protecting the filibuster requires working with Democrats on bipartisan bills.
Now the reality is that Trump, the likely nominee, doesn’t want a deal that Republicans set out to secure four months ago. Deal-making without Trump’s blessing appears impossible, and that’s a challenging dynamic for the longtime GOP leader.
“This wasn’t good for him. This wasn’t good for any of us,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) of McConnell, whom he backed in 2022. “And I’m not gonna say he’s the total cause of it, but we got to have a better plan. This didn’t work out for us.”