posted on Dec, 23 2018 @ 02:42 AM
blackjackel your OP is just another in a long line of attempting to present propaganda, emotions, half truths, cherry picked info and outright LIES to
give legitimacy to clearly anti trump rants.
lets look at your assertions on this one under the glare of intellectual argument, factual context and what THE COURT ACTUALLY SAID.
the law CLEARLY STATES one does not get to "profit from ones crimes"
for example if you sell drugs (a crime) your profits , any items bought using said profits and any items used in said crime are taken by law
enforcement and the courts.
it doesnt matter if (ex) your home that your family stays at if it was bought by drug money.
mobsters , drug dealers, and other criminals may have been living between wealthy and average having their lifestyle destroyed when their crimes were
found out and not allowed to keep a damn thing no matter what hardship it causes.
now factual context
there is a CORRECT WAY to apply for asylum.
you IMMEDIATELY go to the appropriate place (boarder crossing, immigration office , ect) and apply.
the WRONG WAY is to be caught then you claim asylum.
that is trying to benefit (as legal prescient stated above) from your crime (YES IT IS A CRIME) of sneaking across our boarder.
also most when caught and other legal attempts fail (or are failing) they claim Asylum.
factually its BS to go for a while (sometimes years) NOT FOLLOWING LEGAL WAY to claim asylum then ONLY WHEN CAUGHT claim it.
lastly asylum is NOT A RIGHT, ITS A PRIVILEGE
I defy you to show me IN THE CONSTITUTION or the BILL OF RIGHTS just because you claim asylum you are guaranteed to get it.
practically that is why alot dont apply LEGALLY up front because they dont want to risk loosing.
Now if all this doesnt show your just a ranting anti trump lunatic what the court ACTUALLY SAID does all by itself
trump under CONSTITUTIONAL GRANTED AUTHORITY was going to deny anyone HERE ILLEGALLY (key word here ILLEGALLY) would not be granted asylum. they
would have to go back and DO IT LEGALLY.
someone (big surprise... NOT) challenged it in court.
while it was winding its way though the court system trump administration tried to use the courts (yes whats good for the goose is good for the
gander) to restrain the courts from banning implantation while it was being adjudicated.
in short it would go into effect UNLESS they lost the court case and all appeals.
the supreme court DIDNT SAY what he wants to do is unconstitutional.
just its IMPLEMENTATION AT THIS TIME.
even your own postings (but not your title) said same thing.
as usual you take one court ruling against trump and spin it into something it isnt.
where have we heard this before.. hmmmm
the travel ban comes to mind.
look we get it.. you hate trump
you want to use ANYTHING to make him look bad.
but in most if not all your posts all you do is spin things into something THEY ARE NOT to attain your goal
in short just reinforce the fact you dont give a damn about facts , just how you can spin them to your end.