USA Trump dismisses Acting Attorney General

[Stravinsk]

Well aware of it Strav, shutting it down completely is not the answer and also that is just a news report about an action so how do you percieve what Ithink from that? Insults do not become you

Well a few months ago you were of the opinion that Muslim migration/immigration was certainly a problem. A problem for the USA, and certainly a problem for Europe through which some countries have taken in many.

Now you say in another thread "Good for you" to someone's niece because she's holding up a sign that says "We love Refugees".

I'm all for hospitality and kindness to the stranger and the downtrodden - but if I keep hearing stories that strangers of the Muslim variety being taken in by neighbors are acting violently, gang raping women and young girls - far and above as a group more than any other...I'm not going to let them into my home.

"Here - here's my daughter and wife. After you get done destroying them with gang rape and abuse - please make sure to finish the job by mutilating their genitals. Oh, and by the way, I'm being loving and kind by letting you into my home to do all this. Everyone else is a racist bigot".

This is the fact: In many countries Violent crime and especially Violent Sexual Crime particularly against women and young women has absolutely skyrocketed along with the migration of more and more Muslims. Some of these countries have recognized the problem and are starting to kick them out. It can't be ignored anymore that the biggest increases of violence and sexual assault are from MUSLIMS. That's not a racist or bigoted comment - it just happens to be the truth.

So if these countries are starting to mass deport them, how is shutting down immigration from a few countries of NON US CITIZENS/NON US PERMANENT RESIDENTS - who HAVE NO RIGHT - to be in the USA - not the answer?

 

[MoreCoffee]

If this is what Sally Yates has said, then it is apparent to me that Yates is unaware that the USA constitution applies to the USA, and not to people's outside the USA wishing to enter.

Um, duh.

You're claim is not correct. Furthermore there is a 1965 act of the USA congress that prohibits discrimination on the basis of place/nation of birth for immigration and visa purposes.

 

[psalms 91]

Well a few months ago you were of the opinion that Muslim migration/immigration was certainly a problem. A problem for the USA, and certainly a problem for Europe through which some countries have taken in many.

Now you say in another thread "Good for you" to someone's niece because she's holding up a sign that says "We love Refugees".

I'm all for hospitality and kindness to the stranger and the downtrodden - but if I keep hearing stories that strangers of the Muslim variety being taken in by neighbors are acting violently, gang raping women and young girls - far and above as a group more than any other...I'm not going to let them into my home.

"Here - here's my daughter and wife. After you get done destroying them with gang rape and abuse - please make sure to finish the job by mutilating their genitals. Oh, and by the way, I'm being loving and kind by letting you into my home to do all this. Everyone else is a racist bigot".

This is the fact: In many countries Violent crime and especially Violent Sexual Crime particularly against women and young women has absolutely skyrocketed along with the migration of more and more Muslims. Some of these countries have recognized the problem and are starting to kick them out. It can't be ignored anymore that the biggest increases of violence and sexual assault are from MUSLIMS. That's not a racist or bigoted comment - it just happens to be the truth.

So if these countries are starting to mass deport them, how is shutting down immigration from a few countries of NON US CITIZENS/NON US PERMANENT RESIDENTS - who HAVE NO RIGHT - to be in the USA - not the answer?

How about the persecuted Christians, how about those who are only seeking to escape oppression orviolence? The majority of these people only want a safe secure life, I do see letting in anyone as a major problem as europe has discovered but I also do not agree with shutting it down completely

 

[Stravinsk]

You're claim is not correct. Furthermore there is a 1965 act of the USA congress that prohibits discrimination on the basis of place/nation of birth for immigration and visa purposes.

I see. Yes, you are right, because you said so. In Australia - the law is that anyone who drives here on public roads drives on the left. It's an Australia wide law. This of course means that it applies everywhere in the world, by the dumb dumb logic you are using. Australia's constitution also applies not only to Australia - but to every single soul on the earth.

My name is MoreCoffee. I absolutely hate Trump so I'm going to throw basic sense out the window and use any and everything I can to influence public opinion. Even the outrageously stupid.

As for an Act of Congress - I'm unaware of it and if it's true then it does not supersede the US Constitution - which was the argument that was made. Sorry you are so confused. The Constitution of the USA - at the time of formation - was agreed on by all the member States. No single governing body or individual can change it or add to it on a whim.

 

[Brighten04]

LOL.

C'mon. If Sally Yates told you a stork delivered you to your mother, would you believe that too? How easy it must be to mislead you.

I've done a cursory search. So far I've not found anywhere in the USA Constitution that explicitly allows anyone outside the country who is not already a citizen or permanent resident the right of entry.

I don't know Sally Yates. But I know she is a lawyer. I know that lawyers take an oath to uphold the law and the constitution ( my foster daughter is a lawyer and assistant magistrate judge). I know too that there are constitutional laws that govern our immigration process, even though I don't know them. So you are saying Sally Yates lied and broke her oath when she said the ban is unconstitutional (by your condescending stork reference)? Hmmm. That is very interesting.

 

[Stravinsk]

I don't know Sally Yates. But I know she is a lawyer. I know that lawyers take an oath to uphold the law and the constitution ( my foster daughter is a lawyer and assistant magistrate judge). I know too that there are constitutional laws that govern our immigration process, even though I don't know them. So you are saying Sally Yates lied and broke her oath when she said the ban is unconstitutional (by your condescending stork reference)? Hmmm. That is very interesting.

So if you "know" all this - please point me to the relevant US Constitutional passages. Brighten04 - you don't even need to take the time and go the library. Look it up online and show me in the Constitution, then provide me a link. Hey - I could be wrong. But so far I'm not finding anything to prove what you are asserting.

Instead - you ask me to take as proof someone's word, full stop. This is the logical fallacy of Argument from Authority. I don't know Sally Yates either, but I do know she is human and could be mistaken. The stork reference was used because it is condescending. It's as condescending to your intelligence as it is to mine to say that something is true because someone says it is.

Prove it.

 

[Brighten04]

So if you "know" all this - please point me to the relevant US Constitutional passages. Brighten04 - you don't even need to take the time and go the library. Look it up online and show me in the Constitution, then provide me a link. Hey - I could be wrong. But so far I'm not finding anything to prove what you are asserting.

Instead - you ask me to take as proof someone's word, full stop. This is the logical fallacy of Argument from Authority. I don't know Sally Yates either, but I do know she is human and could be mistaken. The stork reference was used because it is condescending. It's as condescending to your intelligence as it is to mine to say that something is true because someone says it is.

Prove it.

So you are saying Sally Yates told a lie? Yes or no please.