It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ahead of Negotiations, Dear Leader Releases Hostages, Gets a 'Thanks Daddy!'

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: The GUT

Define " virtue signalling "
I mean it's a cute term..often thrown around here.
What does it actually mean to you ?


Folk that scream how much of a social conscience they have except if it reflects badly on their candidate or if they actually have to do something about it themselves. It's how they make themselves feel good based on lying to themselves and others.




posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

You asked what should Trump followers do now? Trump supporters should attack him and force President Trump to get a backbone so he doesnt sell his supporters out. This is not the First time that Laura Ingrham and others have tried to go to bat for Trump and now look like fools.

I know he said that Ivanka and Melania made him reverse course but you should kind of consult those close to you first before you rolll some thing out this huge.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

Displaying moral righteousness, or lack there of, in place of logic, to garner or reduce public support, or just make oneself feel better, or another worse...

This was just a personal try at a definition.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


All good. Almost...

It is too often slung around , and like most over used terms is losing it's effect and proper meaning.

I didn't post for reasons of vanity or to make me look good.
What I posted I have full belief in.
It is not posted to curry favour with anyone...I posted what I think is true.

There is a definite need for some new buzz words



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


All good. Almost...

It is too often slung around , and like most over used terms is losing it's effect and proper meaning.

I didn't post for reasons of vanity or to make me look good.
What I posted I have full belief in.
It is not posted to curry favour with anyone...I posted what I think is true.

There is a definite need for some new buzz words


That is true; it is often misused. But it does accurately describe a certain phenomena.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
Anti...

If you ever decide to come over from the dark side.

We would be proud to have you. 😜


Why? We have plenty of scrubs already.

I disagree with POTUS on this action. I wasn't seeing anything wrong with the way the situation was already being handled. We can't start making concessions to cover the stupidity and selfishness of others, even if those others happen to be asshat parents who have decided to risk their childrens' lives on the off chance of making it across the US border undetected.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: The GUT

Not lying...
Not screaming either.

I have no " candidate "
Nothing about this abysmally tragic situation could make anyone " feel good "

I make no apology or denial for having a " social conscience " .....just how ? In anyone's view... could that be perceived as a negative ? Is it better to have no social conscience ?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


All good. Almost...

It is too often slung around , and like most over used terms is losing it's effect and proper meaning.

I didn't post for reasons of vanity or to make me look good.
What I posted I have full belief in.
It is not posted to curry favour with anyone...I posted what I think is true.

There is a definite need for some new buzz words


That is true; it is often misused. But it does accurately describe a certain phenomena.


it sure does... describe one... but i 'degrass'



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

When folk try to lay all the blame at one person's feet it reveals itself as at least somewhat disingenuous. This isn't just a Trump thing and it's not as easy as just saying "Fix it because I really, really care." I care too but do you think we could sustain as a nation for very long if we didn't have border rules?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: theantediluvian

He manufactured this crisis? I would suggest your daily reading material did the manufacturing.







What, wait reading material as in words, are you suggesting words can manufacture actions les?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


All good. Almost...

It is too often slung around , and like most over used terms is losing it's effect and proper meaning.

I didn't post for reasons of vanity or to make me look good.
What I posted I have full belief in.
It is not posted to curry favour with anyone...I posted what I think is true.

There is a definite need for some new buzz words


That is true; it is often misused. But it does accurately describe a certain phenomena.


it sure does... describe one... but i 'degrass'


Is english your second language?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73

Trump didn't create illegal immigration, obviously. Nor is he responsible for the decades of Congressional impasse. What he *is* however responsible for is the decision to alter policy in order to exacerbate the situation and cause undue suffering as leverage to force Congress to enact his agenda.

Please don't fool yourself into thinking this is somehow about Trump wanting every law enforced to the maximum extent possible. The administration is using prosecutorial discretion right now when it comes to other federal laws.

The go to example here would have to be federal authorities not raiding legal (at the state level) pot dispensaries. There's no real popular support on either side of the aisle for a regression on this front to making enforcement a high priority.

But since you want to delve into the legal implications here. From what's coming out on the EO, it's at best a very short-lived stopgap measure as children are only permitted to be detained for 20 days (Flores v Reno, 1997) and Trump's not walking back the zero tolerance policy.

The conflict here being that what they are doing pursuant to the zero tolerance policy is charging illegal immigrants with illegal entry and using that to detain adults whereas with previous administrations, they focused on criminal prosecution of felons (not pursuing misdemeanor illegal entry charges) and released others with follow up in immigration court. (aka "catch and release")

Coupled with that, earlier this month, Sessions also changed the policy for asylum seekers, disqualifying domestic abuse and gang violence as grounds for seeking asylum.

At any rate, the new new policy, which is basically detaining everyone indefinitely, will not hold up in court.
edit on 2018-6-20 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

You either don't understand the policy, you're just regurgitating the media's misleading claims, or you're misleading people on purpose.

Trump's zero tolerance policy simply means he's prosecuting people who illegally enter our borders. The part where the kids get separated has noting to do with Trump. Back in 1996 the 9th circuit court ruled that you could not hold kids with their parents in prison if they were going through deportation proceedings. They even said that doing so was a "deterrent", which is ironic because now separating them is called a deterrent.

So when you say this is Trump's policy, you're being disingenuous and misleading people. Trump's policy is prosecuting people illegally entering the country. Kids being separated is the policy of the most liberal court in the country.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
The thing I have a hard time wrapping my head around is why would anyone want to have their kids in jail with them. A crime is committed person goes to jail, but when no one can take care of the children where do they go? To the streets, left in a ditch. The children were taken by the federal government due to the fact knowone is going to take care of them. So y'all high and mighty anti Trump what ever y'all call Y'all's selves you would be perfectly fine with getting arrested and have your child left on the side of the road. No food, no water, or any forms of protection from the elements. This "policy" has been around for years and years but because of catch and release the problems have increased. Now someone steps up to enforce the law y'all get bent over. It's the law and needs to be enforced. As a side note I'm not a Trump supporter nor did I vote for him but my opinions about the guy changes day to day.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: hillbilly4rent




The thing I have a hard time wrapping my head around is why would anyone want to have their kids in jail with them. A crime is committed person goes to jail, but when no one can take care of the children where do they go? To the streets, left in a ditch. The children were taken by the federal government due to the fact knowone is going to take care of them. So y'all high and mighty anti Trump what ever y'all call Y'all's selves you would be perfectly fine with getting arrested and have your child left on the side of the road. No food, no water, or any forms of protection from the elements. This "policy" has been around for years and years but because of catch and release the problems have increased. Now someone steps up to enforce the law y'all get bent over. It's the law and needs to be enforced. As a side note I'm not a Trump supporter nor did I vote for him but my opinions about the guy changes day to day.


Yeah I don't get it. If I was to be thrown in jail, I would prefer my own child was safe and being taken care. One thing is for certain, the outrage of the "child separation" is pure hokum.



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Isurrender73

Trump didn't create illegal immigration, obviously. Nor is he responsible for the decades of Congressional impasse. What he *is* however responsible for is the decision to alter policy in order to exacerbate the situation and cause undue suffering as leverage to force Congress to enact his agenda.


Fair enough, finally, but have you seen the increased numbers that are attempting this dangerous journey (and either putting their children in the situation, or sending them by themselves, or worse sending them with coyotes.)

The increased numbers are because of lax laws that encourage this. How long can we as a nation deal with this before even more system overload? What about my children's future? I have a responsibility to them don't I?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

The Supreme Court did not give any options other than what the administration has done. There is no legal way to detain law breakers as families. Until now that is.

Thank you president Trump for obeying the laws you were sworn to uphold and fixing the problem when the American populace demanded it.

Letting these people who are entering illegally go free in hopes they will return to court is not an option. If they were willing to break the law they are not likely to show up for court.

The DHS has said you are lying. I'm sure the MSM is looking for a few good spinsters, so you will find adequate employment opportunities. I don't need anything else. Thank you, try again.

www.dhs.gov...


edit on 20-6-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
Trump is the type of guy that issues an EO to alter his own policy.



Or pressured to because the Dems will not sit down to work out a bill.

"#resist" and all that, eh?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: The GUT

Of course not. I agree that there is a need for border control obviously.
What gets me though is how Sessions/ Trump changed the goal posts ( criminalizing asylum seekers by closing certain points of entry ) ...that set this whole thing in motion. Then Trump throws his hands in the air...saying.."uh I hate this too..but congress..the laws....the dimocrats...Obama...bla bla blahhhh..etc etc
Suddenly..under tons of pressure, no doubt from within his own family, he finds his pen, makes his mark and saves the day ?? Puhleeseee

If this was a horrendous policy dating back years and years..why didn't he fix it before now ? Instead of making this DHS woman hold a press con a few days ago defending it ?



posted on Jun, 20 2018 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Holy snip. He really is a genius. Now, if in 20 days, there's no legislation backing this EO and kids are still being detained with their parents Congress won't have a leg to stand on. PLEASE Trump, make me right.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join