9
0

Deportation Thread: You gotta go back


 invite response                  
2025 Jan 23, 12:26pm   13,668 views  718 comments

by AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   ➕follow (10)   ignore (3)  

Gang Members, Drug Dealers, etc. all going back

« First        Comments 384 - 423 of 718       Last »     Search these comments

384   WookieMan   2025 May 8, 10:15am  

Patrick says

Iwog, is that you?

I wish it was. What ever happened to that 2017 crash??? Nothing. Never have I seen a worse prediction. TDS though.
385   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 10:17am  

Patrick says


DeficitHawk is a pretty classic example of a troll, pretending to be rational while deliberately offending, just for the enjoyment of causing as much anger as possible.

Iwog, is that you?

Could also be paid by the DNC, or be AI.


I called him out in his bullshit early on. He then stopped replying to me. Case closed.

The trick is to not play his moving goalposts game. He just does that to string you along as much as possible.
386   GNL   2025 May 8, 11:14am  

Patrick says

DeficitHawk is a pretty classic example of a troll, pretending to be rational while deliberately offending, just for the enjoyment of causing as much anger as possible.

Iwog, is that you?

Could also be paid by the DNC, or be AI.

You're right. I'm letting it go now.
387   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 11:17am  

DeficitHawk says


But if you don't confront them, and you let them become a long term resident, eventually they are considered a tenant and you have to go through eviction proceedings to get them out.

Only is some retarded states like California.

In Florida eviction is pretty quick and easy, and they made it easier a few years ago to evict family members. Florida only gives THREE DAYS before eviction on missed rent.

For transient squatters - those who can't show ANY documentation of their right to be there whatsoever - DO NOT GET A HEARING. Their asses are thrown out by the sheriff and by state law the sheriff and the landlord are immune from paying any damages. Your TV is going out with you, and if it shatters on the way out, tough shit for the squatter.

The "Due Process" for the squatter is the owner telling him to get the fuck out, then going to the Sheriff who checks the property tax register of the county in a minute or is presented with title by the owner and a request the squatter be tossed.

Then away he goes in minutes.
388   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 11:35am  

BTW, Illegal Immigrants are transient squatters. Unlike overstaying or troublesome tenants, they never had a lease to break in the first place. They are transient squatters.

Got any documentation? "F you, yanqui!".
Looks like you had a hearing but didn't go. "F you, ese"
Grab by ear, toss.

Civil Forfeiture could be a great, too. "Well, if you want to contest your deportation, we're taking your pickup, tools, TV, etc."

Of course various NGOs from LARS to CC to HIAC would sadly pay to contest. Gotta protect their federal AND state aid.
389   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 1:35pm  

Patrick says

DeficitHawk is a pretty classic example of a troll, pretending to be rational while deliberately offending

What am I saying that is offensive?

I am citing the law, and the constitution, and the supreme courts rulings on relevant cases. I'm also saying my opinion is more or less the same as SCOTUS on these topics.

Is that offensive to you? I cant imagine why it would be.
390   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 1:46pm  

AmericanKulak says


Only is some retarded states like California.

All states have squatters rights. And all states have tenants laws. No state would allow you to evict a tenant or long term squatter by force without some eviction process being followed.

Details vary by state in terms of duration and process, but no state has no process.

In California, squatters take ownership after 5 years. In Florida its 7 years. Some states require that the squatter has been paying taxes. Some states don't.
All states have squatters rights.
391   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 2:02pm  

DeficitHawk says


All states have squatters rights. And all states have tenants laws. No state would allow you to evict a tenant or long term squatter by force without some eviction process being followed.

I just gave you an example of transient squatters being removed without needing a Judge. Chapter 82 of Florida State Law allows removal of squatters at the satisfaction of the Sheriff, no Judge required.
392   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 2:04pm  

Patrick says

Iwog, is that you?


Maybe I am ApocalypseFuck back from the dead...

Get your yams and belt fed ammo!!!!
393   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 2:04pm  

DeficitHawk says


I am citing the law, and the constitution, and the supreme courts rulings on relevant cases. I'm also saying my opinion is more or less the same as SCOTUS on these topics.

Yep, and SCOTUS has previously decided that FORMER membership in another time and place of certain organized groups, criminal or political, allows deportation in and of itself. Countless persons have been deported on those grounds.

DeficitHawk says

All states have squatters rights. And all states have tenants laws. No state would allow you to evict a tenant or long term squatter by force without some eviction process being followed.

A straw man. I guarantee too that 90% of Deportees never paid income taxes, too. We don't have a federal sales tax, and immigration administrative (not criminal) law DGAF about somebody paying LA+CA sales or excise tax to buy rolling papers at the head shop
394   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 2:05pm  

AmericanKulak says

I just gave you an example of transient squatters being removed without needing a Judge. Chapter 82 of Florida State Law allows removal of squatters at the satisfaction of the Sheriff, no Judge required.


What if they have been there long enough to have a claim on the property? in Florida its 7 years.
395   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 2:07pm  

AmericanKulak says

Yep, and SCOTUS has previously decided that FORMER membership in another time and place of certain organized groups, criminal or political, allows deportation in and of itself

Without due process? Can you cite the SCOTUS case?
396   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 2:08pm  

DeficitHawk says


Without due process? Can you cite the SCOTUS case?

How's this for a source for deportation without due process?


Each year, over 363, 279 – 83 percent – of deportations from the United States are ordered by immigration officers, not judges. Those deported in "summary removal" processes do not get a hearing or a chance to present evidence, or call a lawyer, or even say goodbye to their families before they are banished, sometimes for life.

https://www.aclu.org/news/human-rights/ones-obama-left-behind-and-deported-without-chance-be-heard

ACLU, complaining the Obammunist used "Summary Removal" many thousands of times. No judge required, just the decision of an administrator.

Do you get a hearing when the IRS orders you to pay back taxes? Or do YOU have to initiate a suit?

Wow, Obama "BANISHED!" (clutches pearls) so many people without a hearing. What a dictator, I'm sure you agree.
397   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 2:16pm  

AmericanKulak says

Each year, over 363, 279 – 83 percent – of deportations from the United States are ordered by immigration officers, not judges. Those deported in "summary removal" processes do not get a hearing or a chance to present evidence, or call a lawyer, or even say goodbye to their families before they are banished, sometimes for life.

those are "Arriving" immigrants. They can be deported without due process. Ive been saying that all along, and even cited the SCOUTUS case where it was established to be OK and the 1996 immigration reform laws that formalized the process.
398   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 2:17pm  

DeficitHawk says


Can you cite the SCOTUS case?

Here you go! Notice the part where the SCOTUS affirms leaving it up to immigration officials without the need for a hearing.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/342/580/

These were resident aliens who were in the country for years or decades before being ejected. Not even illegal aliens, so how much less consideration for illegal border violators?
399   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 2:21pm  

It's a new day in America.

We're focused on the outcome, and not letting leftist tricks to suddenly be concerned about process that they are UNconcerned with for asset forfeiture, racism claims, or Red Flag gun confiscation.
400   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 2:30pm  

DeficitHawk says

Is that offensive to you? I cant imagine why it would be.


He's just going to keep playing you. Round and round. Just watch.
401   Patrick   2025 May 8, 2:56pm  

Right, the feigned sincerity and ignorance is part of the game.

"Who, me? What did I do?"
403   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 3:06pm  

MolotovCocktail says


He's just going to keep playing you. Round and round. Just watch.

Yep. hey @MolotovCocktail, what's the thread for Trump Achievements?

We got a Trade Deal with a G-7 Country and all time top trade partner, an American Pope (which regardless of what one thinks how he will be is a prestige victory even if it is to try to shame the US into abiding by Francis' Jesuit Open Borders Liberation Theology), cancelled a $2.5B Tech Diworsity Gender-Racial Bias Program, and the Ukraine parliament is giving us total Rare Earth Metal access.

All in one day, and it's not over yet.
405   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 3:46pm  

Patrick says

Right, the feigned sincerity and ignorance is part of the game.

"Who, me? What did I do?"


Not even I - when I am in Troll mode - am even that assoholicly manipulative.
406   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 3:49pm  

AmericanKulak says

Yep. hey MolotovCocktail, what's the thread for Trump Achievements?


@AmericanKulak how about this one?

https://patrick.net/post/1383287/2025-01-21-did-you-feel-that-47-s-greatest-hits
407   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 6:36pm  

AmericanKulak says


https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/342/580/

This ruling DOES NOT say the immigrants aren't entitled due process... SCOTUS specifically reviewed for, and found no violation of due process in how the lower courts and immigration officials managed the cases. It did not invalidate the right to due process, it says they DID get due process. Whether everyone agrees with that is a separate question. I see the part where one person was both presiding and examining officer, with the consent of the that plaintiff... In my opinion this is a dubious practice, but the court found his consent to that arrangement was sufficient to satisfy due process. And, his case was further reviewed by judges who also upheld the deportation order. The court found this guy DID get due process, he just didn't like the outcome.

This ruling DOES say that immigrants can be banned and deported for membership in a group which is a threat to the country (communist party, this was during McCarthyism), since that was the law congress passed. The court isnt going to intervene against congresses laws unless they are unconstitutional, and they did not find anything unconstitutional in the law.

I am not trying to say we shouldn't have laws or standards that exclude immigrants on the basis of crimes, or associations with criminal organizations. I totally want that done. Criminal history and association with violent gangs are perfectly reasonable disqualifiers, and I completely support that.

I'm saying residents of this country, (no matter their immigration status) are entitled due process per our constitution. Immigrants turned away as they arrive are not.
408   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 6:43pm  

MolotovCocktail says

He's just going to keep playing you.

MolotovCocktail says

Not even I - when I am in Troll mode - am even that assoholicly manipulative.


Im not playing anyone. Im not trolling, moving goalposts, being offensive or anything like that.

I have a simple position: Follow the laws, follow the constitution.

Just because someone else broke a law does not entitle you to violate the laws/constitution in response. Just because you are upset about past policy decisions doesn't entitle you to violate the law/constitution in response.

I don't consider these statements offensive... I consider them the most basic responsibilities of any human in our society.
409   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 7:08pm  

DeficitHawk says


This ruling DOES NOT say the immigrants aren't entitled due process... SCOTUS specifically reviewed for, and found no violation of due process in how the lower courts and immigration officials managed the cases. It did not invalidate the right to due process, it says they DID get due process.


Read it again. Specifically in reference to Due Process, SCOTUS concurred that...


It is pertinent to observe that any policy toward aliens is vitally and intricately interwoven with contemporaneous [342 U.S. 580, 589] policies in regard to the conduct of foreign relations, the war power, and the maintenance of a republican form of government. Such matters are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.

...

We think that, in the present state of the world, it would be rash and irresponsible to reinterpret our fundamental law to deny or qualify the Government's power of deportation. However desirable world-wide amelioration of the lot of aliens, we think it is peculiarly a subject for international diplomacy. It should not be initiated by judicial decision which can only deprive our own Government of a power of defense and reprisal without obtaining for American citizens abroad any reciprocal privileges or immunities. Reform in this field must be entrusted to the branches of the Government in control of our international relations and treaty-making powers.

We hold that the Act is not invalid under the Due Process Clause. These aliens are not entitled to judicial relief unless some other constitutional limitation has been transgressed, to which inquiry we turn.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/342/580.html

Over and over and over again SCOTUS has ruled that Congress and the President, via national security, war powers, and foreign policy, have near total powers over immigration and deportation NOT subject to judicial review.

The Administration is correct and just to ignore the orders to kidnap a wife-beating El Salvadoran citizen and bring him to the United States.

The Judiciary is a co-equal, not superior branch, and multiple SCOTUS decisions and ancient Constitutional precedence back the Administration.

If the Judiciary doesn't like it, let SCOTUS overturn multiple case law going back to the 19th Century in a shock reversal.

Or it can deploy the 2nd Judicial Air Assault Brigade to try to enforce it. heh heh heh
411   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 7:44pm  

DeficitHawk says


Im not playing anyone. Im not trolling, moving goalposts, being offensive or anything like that.


Yes, you are.

Oh, now he is engaging with me....NOT.

He's only doing that to sucker those of you who keep being pulled in to continue doing so.
412   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 7:47pm  

AmericanKulak says

Read it again. Specifically in reference to Due Process, SCOTUS concurred that...

None of those quotes are saying the people are not entitled due process of law.

They are saying the political branches of government get to set the immigration laws and the judicial branch wont interfere with that as long as it doesn't violate the constitution.

AmericanKulak says

We hold that the Act is not invalid under the Due Process Clause. These aliens are not entitled to judicial relief unless some other constitutional limitation has been transgressed, to which inquiry we turn.

This doesn't mean that the people are not entitled due process... it means that the law (The Act) being questioned does not violate due process, so there is no basis for SCOTUS to intervene in the case. They are specifically concerned whether process was followed, and they conclude that it was. They also found it didn't violate other constitutional limitations. So they uphold the lower courts decisions to deport the people.

If these people had been rounded up and sent to El Salvador without being able to challenge their detention, the court would have found a problem of due process. But that's not what happened in this case... they DID challenge their detention and their cases were heard, and their deportation orders were upheld.

This ruling is NOT giving the administration authority to violate the constitution when dealing with immigration. Its finding that they DIDNT violate the constitution so they can proceed with the deportations.
413   MolotovCocktail   2025 May 8, 7:49pm  

Don't continue with his trolling bullshit, @AmericanKulak
414   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 7:57pm  

MolotovCocktail says

He's only doing that to sucker those of you who keep being pulled in to continue doing so.

I get that my opinions are not popular on this site. But I am using facts here to justify my position, and Molotov, you are not.

At least @AmericanKulak is citing some real SCOTUS rulings in his response which I appreciate, although I can not understand the conclusions he reaches by reading the rulings.
415   HeadSet   2025 May 8, 8:03pm  

It seems that the 90% of illegals that simply skip their scheduled immigration hearings had their due process but forfeited it.
416   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 8:05pm  

DeficitHawk says

This doesn't mean that the people are not entitled due process..


LOL, it's literally addressing why they don't need judicial review as part of Due Process and the decision of the Executive following a law of Congress is enough.

MolotovCocktail says

Don't continue with his trolling bullshit, AmericanKulak

You're right.

DeficitHawk says

At least AmericanKulak is citing some real SCOTUS rulings in his response which I appreciate, although I can not understand the conclusions he reaches by reading the rulings.

It literally says the Judiciary is to defer to the political branches about who has to go bye-bye, and limits Due Process in immigration unless some other factor was at play (ie ICE beat the deportee to half to death for no reason). Literally that Judges like Boasberg have no authority to review decisions the political branches make based on Foreign Relations and their perception of National Defense. In fact the Judges say they won't debate whether Communism is a threat or not, and that it isn't their job to decide that, and the Political Branches made up their mind and that's that.
417   AmericanKulakMaximumTrumper   2025 May 8, 8:06pm  

HeadSet says


It seems that the 90% of illegals that simply skip their scheduled immigration hearings had their due process but forfeited it.

Yep, and the Obama-Biden Activists will "decide" that voluntarily skipping your due process means you still didn't get it. Not that you voluntarily forfeited your due process.

So illegals will just keep skipping hearings endlessly. "But your honor, Noviamata skipped 5 hearings."
"Well, schedule his 6th. Eventually Noviamata Perrocena should appear to get his due process."
"What if he skips that one?"
"You want a contempt charge, Border Patrol Lawyer? Then you schedule his 7th. Muhahahahahah"

That's the next step if Trump gives one inch. I've seen way too much of this shit.
418   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 9:51pm  

AmericanKulak says


LOL, it's literally addressing why they don't need judicial review as part of Due Process and the decision of the Executive following a law of Congress is enough.

That's not how I read it at all. That whole section 1 is addressing whether the court should invalidate the Alien Registration Act on the basis of it being outside of congressional authority, or unconstitutional. The plaintiffs tried to argue that permanent residents have a right to remain in the country same as citizens and cant be removed without violating the 5th amendment. But the court didnt agree. The court says "No, we wont invalidate that law. We recognize congresses broad authority in setting immigration laws, and we don't see why this law is unconstitutional.. permanent residents can be deported if congress says so". Section 1 is NOT addressing enforcement procedures or the details of these cases at all. Its just addressing the validity of the law itself.

The next sections 2 and 3 deal with enforcement procedures used in the case, and find that due process was satisfied. The Courts conclusion is that the law is constitutional, and the enforcement in the case met due process standards. It does NOT say courts wont review due process disputes in immigration cases.

I really can not read this and get the same conclusion you got, even after reading it several times.
419   DeficitHawk   2025 May 8, 10:03pm  

AmericanKulak says

Yep, and the Obama-Biden Activists will "decide" that voluntarily skipping your due process means you still didn't get it. Not that you voluntarily forfeited your due process.

I dont agree with that at all. Also, Im ok with them being held in detention until a hearing is held if people are worried about them disappearing. If there is cause to believe they are violating immigration laws, then there is justification for them being detained until hearing.

Hearings should be held promptly if possible, so there isnt a huge backlog of detained people.
420   WookieMan   2025 May 9, 7:36am  

DeficitHawk says

citing some real SCOTUS rulings in his response which I appreciate, although I can not understand the conclusions he reaches by reading the rulings.

Are you an attorney? Do you even know one closely? You don't know what you're talking about.

Talk about why you think it's okay for an MS-13 gang banger, wife beater and illegal to be in this country? I'd deport Americans that beat women. That's why I was vocal on this site about TurtleDove. 1+1 did not equal 2.

People can think this has turned into a right leaning site. I disagree with a lot of people here. But almost all active users are pretty damn smart in my opinion.

Reality is you came here illegally. Someone likely hired you illegally and they should be fined or jailed. Due process is bull shit. Don't do illegal shit, it's not complicated. Stop talking about laws when people know they're breaking them. Fuck 'em they're gone. I've never gone to jail. It's not difficult to follow laws.
421   HeadSet   2025 May 9, 8:03am  

WookieMan says

People can think this has turned into a right leaning site.

Interesting what is now considered "right wing." Most on this site are against the mass import of cheap labor and are for tariffs to protect American jobs. Those are two classic Dem ideas that have been adopted by Trump.
422   WookieMan   2025 May 9, 9:07am  

HeadSet says


WookieMan says
People can think this has turned into a right leaning site.

Interesting what is now considered "right wing." Most on this site are against the mass import of cheap labor and are for tariffs to protect American jobs. Those are two classic Dem ideas that have been adopted by Trump.

Agreed. I'm just saying we have honest discussions and I think most here are smart people. Hawk has been a member since 2011, but comes out of the woodwork when Trump starts doing stuff. Let Trump do his work. Most here will give him shit if he does a bad job. I guess where was he when Biden was running a shit show and destroying our country?

These tariff and some policies are going to be hard to swallow short term. We need to get illegals out of this country though. He's a lame duck and I think the long term play is good. I currently don't know anyone bitching about not having work. I'm not everyone, but if times were tough I'd hear about it from friends. I haven't.

Sending illegals back might be good for their countries as well. They likely learned skills here. If we trade with them transportation is less than China and could be to any destination in 48-72 hours from Mexico at least. Supply chain cuts massive costs and can be changed quickly. Not 2-4 weeks.
423   WookieMan   2025 May 9, 9:14am  

Side note, I want American jobs, but Mexico is a massive positive thing for Americans. Border under control. Less costs to American business. Shipping on water is cheap, but time is money and you have a tighter supply chain. Waiting 2 weeks plus for a product and then realize no one is buying it. That's a massive problem. That hurts American business more than getting slave labor.

« First        Comments 384 - 423 of 718       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   users   suggestions   gaiste