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.

 

Strong support for Trump linked to willingness to persecute immigrants and commit violence.

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   
www.realclearpolitics.com...

Propagandists throughout history have long known that repetition acts as the propellant of falsehoods. Thus, the Democrat media narrative machine incessantly infects our political dialogue with the unsubstantiated smear that President Trump and his supporters are racists. Last week, actor Jeff Daniels, of “Dumb and Dumber” fame, appeared on MSNBC and delivered an all-too-typical elitist rant against the concerns of working-class Americans whom, they portend, are largely motivated by racial animus. He assailed the Republican agenda as inherently bigoted: “At the end of the day, aside from, ‘Yeah, I don’t want to pay taxes,’ it’s race. It’s race. This is about the Republican Party or a wing of it going, ‘This is our last chance to save the party and if we don’t, it’s the end of the Republican Party.’ The only way they can do that was to tap the race button and say, ‘Go ahead, it’s okay.'” Anchor Nicolle Wallace proclaimed Daniels’s current Broadway role as Atticus Finch in “To Kill a Mockingbird” as relevant to the present moment. While the lessons of that esteemed Harper Lee story will always be illustrative, Wallace’s contention was clear: 2019 America resembles the 1930s in the fictional Maycomb, Alabama. Really? In point of fact, while racism of course still exists and poisons the hearts of some, the kind of institutional, systemic oppression that marked the South of 100 years ago has been largely eradicated by decades of legal protections for previously abused groups. If anything, as I can attest as a minority myself, the laws and policies of today provide actual advantages to citizens of color in critical areas like higher education and government contracting. But aside from laws, our cultural progress on these issues stands out even more impressively. Interracial relationships are now totally unremarkable. This country, which once viewed black men as property, elected one to the presidency -- twice in fact. His wife, former first lady Michelle Obama, was named in a Gallup poll as America’s most admired woman for 2018, with another black woman, Oprah Winfrey, taking second place.
so yeah if they keep it up it just keeps playing to the rights benifit




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: MisterSpock
The reason the left has a hard time getting any traction with this is the usual attempt to conflate "immigration" and "ILLEGAL immigration".

By dropping the "illegal" part and painting anyone as some sort of evil racist, it just pisses off people that can quantify the distinction and make those that chose to conflate the two as the slobbering morons they are.



You shouldn't insult slobbering morons.

Not that they shouldn't be insulted for posting something like this...

But because they won't understand that you are insulting them in the first place.

It's like kicking a puppy...




Perhaps you could post some valid rebuttal from a scientific journal of the same caliber as New Scientist?

Slinging empty insults does not require any great intellectual power.




The same place that has reported on a peer-reviewed paper that links penises to climate change?


Please post a supportive link to that. I tried and could find no reference to New Scientist and an article that made such a claim.

There was a hoax article in Cogent Social Sciences journal but that's not New Scientist.


Intellectual power indeed.

An honest question...

Why do you think your opinion matters?




Why do you think your opinion matters?

I'm actually here for the debate. I don't think I'm likely to change anyone's opinions.

It's fun to debate with Americans because they believe that the accident of where they were born lends them greater "rightness" than anyone else on the planet. But when you challenge them about the things they believe, there's this great nothing for a while, then the repeat all the jingoistic slogans like "liberty" and "justice" and so forth (if justice were served, they wouldn't be at liberty, would they).



Ultimately, I don't really care if the President's toupee is smarter than a 'coon pelt.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 12:27 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
No cited sources OP, yet it is funny watching the triggered trumbots line up to defend their messiah.

Lol tools
Yeah, you should probably take a hard look in the mirror.

Also, "triggered Trumpbots", are you seriously that lazy?

When tools talk about tools, they end up going in circles, like a dog chasing its tail, nothing we haven't seen before, so keep chasing 😏



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 12:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: chr0naut

You do realize that your entire post is BS.

Point out to me in our Constitution "birthright citizenship" as it applies to illegal aliens.


The first sentence of the 14th Amendment states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Fairly absolute and clear, isn't it.

However, what you said was about "illegal aliens" is unreasonable. If they are born there, how can they be aliens (with alien being taken to mean "a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized and is still a subject or citizen of a foreign country)? If being born in America is not somehow illegal, then what makes them either illegal or alien?




Point out please where a President is not allowed to declare a National Emergency at his discretion.


Nothing. Your president can call a national emergency over burnt toast.

The only way it can be ended is if the President declares it so, or if Congress enacts a joint resolution (which also requires sign off from the President, so basically, only a President can end it anyway).

In a state of national emergency, the President can then override parts of the constitution for 'emergency purposes'.

You gotta love how advanced and well designed the US system of government is.




Point out to me how he has had any issues with the Emoluments clause when it doesn't include businesses that he had prior to becoming the President, where it even applies when Trump currently does not own any of his businesses and all monies made by foreigners to his hotels now is donated to the Treasury.


Trump doesn't make much money from foreign interests, compared to what he makes from the US market.

Trump has put his two sons in charge, but has maintained a financial stake in the company, to the extent that he will resume directorship at the end of his Presidency.

The emoluments clause was put there to prevent conflict of interest between national concerns and those of his business dealings.

Trump is not compliant with the stipulations of the Constitution. It is that simple.


I could go on but let's face it... you have been sold a bill of goods and your confirmation bias leads you by the nose to actually believe the lies.

You're a puppet.

And the funny part is this isn't even your country.

Yet here you are, day in and day out, working so hard to make Trump win in 2020.

Keep it up!!!!



I'm not a puppet. I am quite an individual and not manipulated by anyone 'above me' in some sort of pecking order.

If Trump gets re-elected, then I will get neither the advantages if all goes well, nor the deprivations if it all falls down.

They all fall to the American public. They will get who they vote for (possibly, there is that special privilege imbalancer, the Electoral College, which also has a spin at the roulette wheel).


edit on 9/9/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:08 AM
link   
“More willing to persecute Iranians and immigrants”

Who is the retarded five year old who wrote the OP?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

“And subject to the jurisdiction thereof”

It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

Or is it?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

🤣 Polar bear penis bone may be weakened by pollution 🤣


Pollution and climate change are different things.

The paper measured PCB abundance in Polar Bear fat and noted a reduced bone density in X-Ray measurements. The paper suggested that there may have been a correlation, but did not establish that.

In the four years since it was published, the same readings were verified but the correlation between them has been largely disproven.

Despite the giggle factor, the paper was a valid biological study.

The re-reportage by other publications (namely The Washington Post), conflating the pollution as "climate change" was the thing that was non factual.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


None of them will stop what has begun.. and is destined to continue.


So you are a determinism. Is it correct to assume that this means what God has brought about will continue it's course? That it is God''s Will that Trump win again? That he will,win again?

If so, then hypothectically, how will you think should he lose. What will you think? Will you think that who ever beats him is working for the devil? That any potential winner against Trump will be Satan's Pawn? Is this what you are saying?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

They are cultists who need to de deprogrammed.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
a reply to: chr0naut

“And subject to the jurisdiction thereof”

It’s not a hard concept to grasp.

Or is it?


So, are you suggesting that this says that people born in the US are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?

For the states, jurisdiction falls naturally to everything within their borders except for areas sold to the Federal government. So, essentially, the jurisdiction of the US is defined geographically within its borders.

So, no, it doesn't doesn't define what the condition would be that might make someone born within the country's borders not subject to the country's jurisdiction.

As an argument against birthright citizenship, it misses the mark.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:29 AM
link   
a reply to: clubheadjobby

And what do you know about deprograming cultists club? Banging them over the head with name calling and blunt instruments of information that already has retorts and justifications built into the teachings of the cult? Alienating a cult member is never on the top of the list of how to's unless you have them kidnapped and isolated from their echo chamber.

ATS is not an isolated environment to do this, it is a tightly wound echo chamber and tactics of alienation only antagonize.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:33 AM
link   
Trump is PRO immigration
Trump supporters are PRO immigration
The Republican Party is PRO immigration

Opposing ILLEGAL immigration does NOT make you ‘anti immigration’

Not by anyone’s twisted definition

The United States was built on immigration.

ILLEGAL immigration is disastrous to ALL nations.

Which is why NO NATION ON EARTH has open borders.

Why the low-iq morons of the world think that the USA ( and ONLY the USA) should have no immigration laws, is beyond comprehension.

The OP and the links in the OP were written by low-iq individuals.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock
a reply to: chr0naut

Excellent, how could we hope to get through a thread on US immigration without the resident legal expert from some random island thousands of miles away....

I see you hand washed all your hobits early tonight and the wife let you get online to impart your worthless NZ perspective unto our country......

Don't you have some guns to "voluntarily" turn into your "non authoritarian" government?


I have never needed to have a gun to surrender.

Very few NZ'ers have guns in the first place.

That's probably why we get so 'uppity' when some foreigner comes in with his stupid hatred and shoots up the place.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

No

I’m suggesting that ILLEGAL immigrants are not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’. Meaning they are NOT subject to entitlements granted to citizens, the ONLY ‘entitlement’ they are subject to is deportation.

The baby can stay on its own and be adopted out. But sneaking across a border and having a baby does NOT grant you citizenship. Not by ANY law.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:43 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

What came first ....

The chicken or the egg ? 😃 🐔 🥚 🍳



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Yea that's what I am saying. I do know there are people who actually fall for it. I just cant understand their logic anymore. The few I know who fall for it is because their wife is telling them to.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 04:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: chr0naut




Who in their right mind would believe that the Democrats support any of this?


For your viewing pleasure



In living color


So, he speaks for the Democrats, does he?

Surely a mouthpiece of the Republican party isn't going to present Democrat views accurately.

Do you think if you went to the Satanists, that they'd give you Biblical truth about Jesus?


edit on 9/9/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 04:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
a reply to: chr0naut

No

I’m suggesting that ILLEGAL immigrants are not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’. Meaning they are NOT subject to entitlements granted to citizens, the ONLY ‘entitlement’ they are subject to is deportation.

The baby can stay on its own and be adopted out. But sneaking across a border and having a baby does NOT grant you citizenship. Not by ANY law.


Then what authority empowers ICE to arrest and detain? If people are within the US borders, they are under the authority of US law (even at foreign embassies within the US).

Sneaking across borders, or having a child does not grant citizenship to the parents. Being born in a country, under birthright citizenship, does. The baby is a citizen, by birth.

Also, you seem to have read the word "entitlement", where it wasn't. The words "entitlement" or "entitled" are absent from the text of the 14th amendment entirely.

edit on 9/9/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 04:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

What came first ....

The chicken or the egg ? 😃 🐔 🥚 🍳


Since the mutated genome that became a chicken would develop and mature in the normal progression (and its parents, who lacked the mutation, weren't exactly chickens), then the answer is undoubtedly 'the egg'.







 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join