Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
201 - 220 of 282 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,445 Posts
And this SCOTUS has been doing all that you claim is its job consistently over the years hasn't it. Without waver.
Saying that we cannot deport a illegal enemy/weapon that is part of the war to destroy American Sovereignty and this Constitutional Republic is crap. They are aiding and abetting a law breaker to be here and to continue to break the law. They are supposed to be upholding it. It is illegal to enter the US illegally is it not? Where is the justice for Americans? Not in any branch of the ex American Government. These types of decisions make a mockery of the rule of law and they do it using semantics.
"Where is the justice for Americans"?
The Court upholding the Federal Law as written in this case ( or any case) I believe is justice for all Americans.
Now with that said I don't like it a damn bit, but at some point the law has to be upheld regardless of what we think should be done. It just needs to be upheld all the time and not just by a few. Don't worry I've not been converted. We just see this one different. Now as to the Court passing on cases I have no answer for that bag of worms.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
And this SCOTUS has been doing all that you claim is its job consistently over the years hasn't it. Without waver.
Saying that we cannot deport a illegal enemy/weapon that is part of the war to destroy American Sovereignty and this Constitutional Republic is crap. They are aiding and abetting a law breaker to be here and to continue to break the law. They are supposed to be upholding it. It is illegal to enter the US illegally is it not? Where is the justice for Americans? Not in any branch of the ex American Government. These types of decisions make a mockery of the rule of law and they do it using semantics.
Wow. And we wonder why Americans think holding a "protest" outside the Supreme Court is a good idea.

If you accept the principle that judges can pervert the law when it favors you, then do not act offended when that same principle is used against you.
 

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #204 ·
Wow. And we wonder why Americans think holding a "protest" outside the Supreme Court is a good idea.

If you accept the principle that judges can pervert the law when it favors you, then do not act offended when that same principle is used against you.
It already has been used against us over and over again.
 

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #205 ·
The Constitution is nothing anymore than so much pulp and words except for lawyers and judges who garner money and importance (mostly to themselves). Justice in America is dead.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
And you are helping kill it with your advocacy against a judge's proper role. You can't put yourself above the fray in your own mind as some sort of moral superior when you are down in it flinging mud and poop.

You either support a judge's proper role in a constitutional system or you do not. Of course, you have already made it clear that you do not. You want judges to be a super legislature of activist politicians.

That is a bad result for the country and even for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 45_Fan

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #207 · (Edited)
And you are helping kill it with your advocacy against a judge's proper role. You can't put yourself above the fray in your own mind as some sort of moral superior when you are down in it flinging mud and poop.

You either support a judge's proper role in a constitutional system or you do not. Of course, you have already made it clear that you do not. You want judges to be a super legislature of activist politicians.

That is a bad result for the country and even for you.
You're correct. What source do you use to read the arguments and decisions related to cases like this? I wind up reading snippets here and there but I really need to do better. What is your consistent go to source for all the first hand info on such as these cases? Thanks in advance.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
You're correct. What source do you use to read the arguments and decisions related to cases like this? I wind up reading snippets here and there but I really need to do better. What is your consistent go to source for all the first hand info on such as these cases? Thanks in advance.
I am embarrassed to say I do not have one. Oyez or scotusblog sometimes, or, like in this case, I just use Google to find the actual opinion (on the Supreme Court's official web site).

 
  • Like
Reactions: Bkite

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
Gorsuch is witty. His introductory paragraph.

Anyone who has applied for a passport, filed for Social Security benefits, or sought a license understands the government’s affinity for forms. Make a mistake or skip a page? Go back and try again, sometimes with a penalty for the trouble. But it turns out the federal government finds some of its forms frustrating too. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), 110 Stat. 3009–546, requires the government to serve “a notice to appear” on individuals it wishes to remove from this country. At first blush, a notice to appear might seem to be just that—a single document containing all the information an individual needs to know about his removal hearing. But, the government says, supplying so much information in a single form is too taxing. It needs more flexibility, allowing its officials to provide information in separate mailings (as many as they wish) over time (as long as they find convenient). The question for us is whether the law Congress adopted tolerates the government’s preferred practice.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,743 Posts
. . . our “sole function” is to apply the law as we find it, not defer to some conflicting reading the government might advance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,445 Posts
This seems a fitting place for the link below. A good read. Keep it it mind for when you have time to read it carefully.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,754 Posts
This seems a fitting place for the link below. A good read. Keep it it mind for when you have time to read it carefully.

The problem is it’s all premised on a very unsupportable hypothetical ”IF” that lacks factual basis. An act of insurrection based on myth and rumor is treason and not patriotism.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,445 Posts
The problem is it’s all premised on a very unsupportable hypothetical ”IF” that lacks factual basis. An act of insurrection based on myth and rumor is treason and not patriotism.
The article is based on IF that happen. If it was proven by fact and if it indeed was proven to have happen. I see nowhere it stated insurrection based on rumor and other bullshit should happen. Your last sentence is correct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,754 Posts
The article is based on IF that happen. If it was proven by fact and if it indeed was proven to have happen. I see nowhere it stated insurrection based on rumor and other bullshit should happen. Your last sentence is correct.
Okay, less polite mode. The article constructs a leading question based on falsehoods and is even thoughtfully formatted to copycat the Declaration of Independence for emotional (not patriotic) connection. It contains at best a dehumanization of the “other” or, worse, a basis in ad hominem to evoke strong emotional reactions from those too stressed to challenge the wall of hypotheticals (falsehoods) and presents a “fix” to the despairing by setting up a “hey, that wouldn’t be treason IF one truly believes it” emotional plea. Brutus was an honorable man...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,445 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
The problem is it’s all premised on a very unsupportable hypothetical ”IF” that lacks factual basis.
The Arizona recount hasn't been completed yet. I'd withhold judgement until it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,754 Posts
The Arizona recount hasn't been completed yet. I'd withhold judgement until it is.
About that recount...

They are apparently recounting less than 25,000 ballots per day?
The developments come as the counting of 2.1 million ballots from the November election won by President Joe Biden are off to a slow pace. Bennett told the Associated Press Tuesday night that teams doing a hand recount of the presidential race lost by former President Donald Trump and the U.S. Senate race won by Democrat Mark Kelly has tallied less than 10% of the ballots since starting on April 23.
This is on top of other problems such as ballot security and apparent lack of explainable recount processes. I’m not holding my breath on this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
About that recount...
They are apparently recounting less than 25,000 ballots per day?
Darned if I know. I'm not there. But if those numbers are correct that's about 3 months. So what? There's no time limit that I'm aware of. And I think that's using a single shift. There was talk of bringing on a full 3 shifts.

This is on top of other problems such as ballot security and apparent lack of explainable recount processes. I’m not holding my breath on this one.
Amazingly, using a source of a different political leaning provides a different perspective on things.
The DOJ sent a letter to Fann requesting information that Federal law isn’t being broken (based on news reports and hearsay IMO).

1. They want to know if there is proper security protecting the ballots so that they are not at risk of being altered, destroyed, tampered with, stolen, etc.

Kelli Ward: There are 19 armed guards there in addition to security cameras everywhere as well as the 9 public cameras.
There's a crap ton of articles on the AZ recount at The Gateway Pundit - Where Hope Finally Made a Comeback
 
201 - 220 of 282 Posts
Top