Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
57 minutes ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Pathetic even by his pathetically low standards. 
 

 

Did he use a sharpie on the photo?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 3
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, JBJ said:

Not a shithole @immamac

I have been a little busy on this Good Friday. 

In a concise way can you tell me why you're ok with the recent activity of ICE?

img_1_1745026319924.jpg

Edited by cactusflinthead
Picture is worth some number of words
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Is it even a stretch to imagine a situation where six months from now, Trump declares protesters "terrorists"? And, same deal, no rights for terrorists. I can hear him saying "If you don't want to be labeled a terrorist, don't act like a terrorist." And, off they go. 

you're thinking tooooo small bro. you haven't had an "incident" yet. Just wait till you have one - terrorist attack, bomb, jewish space laser strike, weather weapon strike, god forbid democratic political violence haha good luck with any of that

then its all democrats that are causing the issue. which includes unis, lawyers, doctors, and any white collar people basically. 

and everything posted here and elsewhere becomes "evidence". and speaking of that soon you will have AI bots running massive data models finding the real trouble-makers. just wait. 

but yeah maybe we have to do the protestors first to wet the appetite a bit before going full crackdown

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, JBJ said:

The SCOTUS ruling was kind of a punt.  I think that's actually a contributing factor.  

That I actually agree with. S.ct fucked this up being pussy cowards avoiding the fight instead of fighting the fight that was coming for their branch and our country. +pos rep 

5 hours ago, JBJ said:

This was an Executive error.

Trump is resisting the court order or at least maliciously compliant while he is farming it for support.

It's not any sort of case to have a constitutional crisis over.

This I don’t agree with. If the executive commits an error, is told it is illegal, and refuses to correct it post haste, it DOESN’T FUCKING MATTER what the error is, it’s a de facto constitutional crisis. Anything less than acknowledging this, is a fault on the person trying to justify it. And considering it is a violation of a court removal order, then yeah it’s a huge fucking deal. 

so fuggle or any actual immigration lawyers feel free to chime in (I am by no means claiming to be an expert) but I got this info from my gf who has been a pro bono immigration lawyer/department boss for over a decade. Garcia got a withhold order of removal under CAT (convention against torture). That means he was found to more likely than not (>50%) be persecuted/tortured in the country to which he is to be removed to (more often than not his home country). As opposed to asylum where they only need to prove there is a >10% chance that there is a nexus for his prosecution (race, religion, nationality. Social group membership, or political opinion). So you’re definitely partially correct, there are more restrictions for removal withholds despite having a higher bar: before he was disappeared he couldn’t leave the country, had to regularly check in, didn’t have a green card, but he did have access to a work permit. 

So that CAT withhold order of removal means he can be sent to another country but he CANNOT be sent to El Salvador. Simple as fuck even magats should be able to understand but Fox News is the bane of this country’s existence. 

All in all that for me means dotard fucked up by removing him without due process, and especially for sending him to El Salvador since he is not only resisting a lawful court order but directly violating it by removing him to cecot.

and if you say so what, he was removed, even if he comes back he’ll he denied access. Well you’d be fucking wrong. The proper channel to contest the withhold order of removal would be to appeal to the BIA, then the circuit court, etc. Essentially, don’t like it appeal to the judicial system and Rubio’s punk bitch ass and AG Nazi barbi bondi can get fucked. 

bring him back and give him due process but executive orders mean fuck all here and especially no sabo coconut Rubio. 

Edited by achooloco
  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

hey Mr. "not gonna die on this hill but I'll spam-troll cloak room and threaten to leave when called out for flat out falsity" - go fuck yourself.

this is such a bitchass move and fuck you for using it. you don't get to come in here with your facts all fucked up, and when you're are fucking plainly called out for it, bitch out and hide under @immamac's weird protective umbrella. 

you are either a liar or a collaborator or a fool.

I'm so tired of this dumb bullshit. 

calling out posters for being liars is not community destroying. it's community self- regulation. Jbj came in here pretending not to care but then fired off how many posts? Lol, whatever bro.

 

And if he had come back saying, mea culpa, I got confused, all would be good. He double and tripled downed, blamed everyone else for him being confused, and took zero accountability. He is a shitty person and absolutely deserves to be called out on it. Coddling these fucks helps absolutely no one. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Red Five said:

Holy fuck. We've got 3.75 more years of this shit. If we're lucky. 

We'll be fondly remembering this time as the salad days of our lives

Posted
23 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Shit, we can’t even get them air conditioning. Texas is fucking ridiculous. 

It's worse.

We could get them AC, but we don't.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, miguelito said:

It's worse.

We could get them AC, but we don't.

 

Because that's going to cost money and nobody is going to spend one dime more than necessary on convicts. Empathy is for losers. Visited me in prison? That's what Jesus said to do? Yeah, you read that wrong. He said fuck'em and throw them in the hole.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 hours ago, JBJ said:

Shitpost response to the place being a shithole.  Ironic but not unexpected.

everyone who negged jbj for this should negate their neg with a random rep for him to balance your karma

it is not his fault that he is in flatland

Posted
3 hours ago, Red Five said:

Is it even a stretch to imagine a situation where six months from now, Trump declares protesters "terrorists"? And, same deal, no rights for terrorists. I can hear him saying "If you don't want to be labeled a terrorist, don't act like a terrorist." And, off they go. 

we shouldn't have to wait that long..... 

gorka said “And you have to ask yourself: Are they technically aiding and abetting them? Because aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists is a crime in federal statute.”

did a UNITED STATES SENATOR aid and abett kilmar, who with no evidence or due process team cheeto has declared a terrorist?

Posted
6 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 

I'm a lil shocked, especially given the procedural posture there.

@wildcat09 you were saying? It is an administrative order, only, so they could turn on a dime, but  . . . . 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 4/17/2025 at 9:36 PM, C-Man said:


You’re an idiot. Biden was doing just fine as POTUS. He just could no longer effectively campaign because Americans are dumb AF.

No. Just no. It was an egregious, unforgivable mistake for him to run for a second term. Everyone who enabled that decision is complicit. He was a walking cadaver by summer and was kept from public view except for very short, controlled appearances for 18 months prior. Americans have eyes

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

No. Just no. It was an egregious, unforgivable mistake for him to run for a second term. Everyone who enabled that decision is complicit. He was a walking cadaver by summer and was kept from public view except for very short, controlled appearances for 18 months prior. Americans have eyes

Both can be true.

Biden was capable, with good staff, which he mostly had, to do what he needed to do.

But the optics of it were terrible.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Both can be true.

Biden was capable, with good staff, which he mostly had, to do what he needed to do.

But the optics of it were terrible.

Where is the proof he was capable of anything related to running the country? I agree the country was run capably. For the last 18+ months, I don’t know how you conclude from what we were allowed to see that Biden played any material role in it. And I’m not saying there is evidence the 25th should have been invoked, but he damn sure should have been prevented from running for a second term

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Where is the proof he was capable of anything related to running the country? I agree the country was run capably. For the last 18+ months, I don’t know how you conclude from what we were allowed to see that Biden played any material role in it. And I’m not saying there is evidence the 25th should have been invoked, but he damn sure should have been prevented from running for a second term

Because, by and large, I don't think the person of POTUS, once a staff has been assembled and a policy direction established, is all that critical to running the country.  Just need a few hours of coherence on a daily basis.

You concede that the country was run competently with Biden in a less than ideal state.

I also concede that he couldn't campaign, and also couldn't likely do some of the more cosmetic parts of the office and that it wasn't going to get better.

Posted
7 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Biden in a coma as POTUS would be exponentially better than Trump.

My morning dump would be an exponentially better POTUS than Trump. But to be POTUS you have to win an election. And here we are. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

My morning dump would be an exponentially better POTUS than Trump. But to be POTUS you have to win an election. And here we are. 

molly ringwald stop GIF

Posted
18 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

AARP brought this suit?  Fuck, I might just join.

AARP are the initials of one of the plaintiffs, permitted to proceed anonymously.

Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm a lil shocked, especially given the procedural posture there.

@wildcat09 you were saying? It is an administrative order, only, so they could turn on a dime, but  . . . . 

Well, if Roberts has flipped and is suddenly going to decide that he was wrong that "deportations" under the AEA can only be challenged via individualized habeas actions, that'd be the quickest "we fucked up" in SCOTUS history. They usually wait at least ten years before even implicitly admitting they fucked up.

Since this is an administrative stay, my guess is Roberts wants a little more time to figure out how he can better define the notice requirements they established under J.G.G. two weeks ago. But that was when he fucked up and, short of openly admitting that order was wrong and Boasberg's TRO was appropriate, I don't see how they can fix the problem Roberts walked them into. Boasberg's TRO was clearly necessary and that challenge under the APA should've been allowed to proceed. But Roberts wanted to give Trump enough wriggle room to mass deport people without it looking like Trump was clearly violating both court orders and human rights (knowing that even with notice, most of the detainees wouldn't be able to effectively file habeas actions), and lacked the foresight to understand how the administration would respond to the nice clever little loophole Roberts had given them. So he's basically back where he started, but now trying to figure out a way around his own ruling from two weeks ago that rewrote a whole lot of law on the fly, wholly based on political considerations and without putting any real thought into the legal implications. 

Maybe Roberts actually is just genuinely a dumbass.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

One fun little angle on this is that the Court didn't act through Alito. For those that don't know each circuit has one justice "assigned" to evaluate appeals from that circuit, who can act individually and/or refer the appeal to the full SCOTUS for consideration. Typically in a scenario like this, you would expect the assigned justice (in this case, Alito) to issue an administrative stay to give the court a couple of days to figure out what it wants to do. But the order doesn't mention anything about Alito having referred the case to the court, so it's possible (if not likely) that he refused to issue a stay and pissed off the rest of the justices. The other possibility is simply that he wanted to delay the order so he could waste a week writing a dissent, giving Trump time to render a few thousand more people to CECOT and the other justices told him to get fucked.  

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
Apparently Alito really, really wants to go to Hell.

It’d be a damn shame if someone sent him there.
And realize how fucked up this is: it’s apparent that we really miss the sane, decent, and moderating influence that used to keep Alito somewhat in check: Scalia.
  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted
5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

AARP are the initials of one of the plaintiffs, permitted to proceed anonymously.

Dumb question alert: are you saying there are plaintiffs with the actual initials AA and RP (or four plaintiffs with an initial beginning with A, A, R, and P) but the full name is anonymous? Or is AARP totally random and just happens to be the same acronym as the AARP for retired people?

Posted
6 minutes ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Dumb question alert: are you saying there are plaintiffs with the actual initials AA and RP (or four plaintiffs with an initial beginning with A, A, R, and P) but the full name is anonymous? Or is AARP totally random and just happens to be the same acronym as the AARP for retired people?

Latinos have long names so it could easily be something like Antonio Alejandro Riojas Perez (you killed my father, prepare to die, yada yada)

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:


It’d be a damn shame if someone sent him there.
And realize how fucked up this is: it’s apparent that we really miss the sane, decent, and moderating influence that used to keep Alito somewhat in check: Scalia.

If alito died today, for whatever reason, who do you think takes his place and how quickly do you think they make that happen?

Posted
1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

If alito died today, for whatever reason, who do you think takes his place and how quickly do you think they make that happen?

Trump owes Aileen Cannon a solid.

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

If alito died today, for whatever reason, who do you think takes his place and how quickly do you think they make that happen?

I don’t know, but sometimes I think that if we had just let Bush put Harriet Miers on the SC, we wouldn’t have to deal with the asshole that is Alito. 

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

Dumb question alert: are you saying there are plaintiffs with the actual initials AA and RP (or four plaintiffs with an initial beginning with A, A, R, and P) but the full name is anonymous? Or is AARP totally random and just happens to be the same acronym as the AARP for retired people?

.

Edited by bonnieblue


×
×
  • Create New...