House has voted to impeach Mayorkas

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Where in the Senate bill would have tightened up those asylum loopholes? 😀

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Ahem, from our resident self proclaimed "fact finder:"



You ever heard of the Constitution?

Ya might want to check that out about asylum seekers.

I don't who this posted that, where or when, since you didn't link it, or assign credit to anyone. But, this self proclaimed "fact finder" says;

It might be) (critical component, if anyone were claiming a constitutional right to asylum. But, nobody is, and you're presenting an intellectually dishonest criterion.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Coelacanth55

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Coelacanth55

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: JinMI

Bah. This is nothing more than political theater to get the Republican base fired up before election time. It's nothing more than, "Hey everyone look. We did a thing.". While they don't vote on anything and pull a bunch of stunts.

I’m so sick of the infighting. Isn’t there a country to run?

Maybe they should work together and find a compromise.

Republicans: "Seal the border. Control immigration."
Democrats: 'Open the border. Let everybody in."

how do we compromise on this?

You ever heard of the Constitution?

Ya might want to check that out about asylum seekers.

there is a legal process for asylum. crossing the border illegally is not it.

If you’re on US soil you can request asylum.

Even if you enter illegally.

That is a fact.

and over 70% of those who claim it, don't get it because they lied. Also a fact.

That's how they're overloading the system. Mass Border crossings, no instant rulings. Cloward-Piven. Using loose limbo policies to flood the cities. 😃

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: KrustyKrab

Funny how everyone was on board with it. Until Trump said no.

And let's be honest. Most of these bills are written poorly and unsustainable.

Actually most were not on board with it. 😀

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: KrustyKrab

Funny how everyone was on board with it. Until Trump said no.

Is that what the teevee told you?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

(R)s sent a good Bill (HR2) to The Senate, but mental case Schumer stalled it and it was never brought up. Why was that? 😀

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Where in the Senate bill would have tightened up those asylum loopholes? 😀

Under Subtitle B—Asylum Processing at the Border.
Check out: ‘(d) PROTECTION MERITS DETERMINATION.—
And, TITLE II—ASYLUM PROCESSING ENHANCEMENTS
And, SEC. 3608. GAO ANALYSIS OF IMMIGRATION JUDGE AND ASYLUM OFFICER DECISION-MAKING REGARDING ASYLUM, WITHHOLDING OF REMOVAL, AND PROTECTION UNDER THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE.

Start there.

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
a reply to: Sookiechacha

(R)s sent a good Bill (HR2) to The Senate, but mental case Schumer stalled it and it was never brought up. Why was that? 😀

Was it good? What about the bill was good?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Where in the Senate bill would have tightened up those asylum loopholes? 😀

Under Subtitle B—Asylum Processing at the Border.
Check out: ‘(d) PROTECTION MERITS DETERMINATION.—
And, TITLE II—ASYLUM PROCESSING ENHANCEMENTS
And, SEC. 3608. GAO ANALYSIS OF IMMIGRATION JUDGE AND ASYLUM OFFICER DECISION-MAKING REGARDING ASYLUM, WITHHOLDING OF REMOVAL, AND PROTECTION UNDER THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE.

Start there.

No link? Of course not excuse me for asking. You didn't quote the actual wording. 😀

Ooops! Here comes the Democrat revenge tactics 😀


After border bill failure, ICE considers mass releases to close budget gap

a reply to: WingDingLuey

The link is in the edit box of my post, with the information that you requested, and has been there, in the edit box since about 3 seconds after I first posted my post, with the exact headings from the bill as they appear in the bill. That way you can easily search the document using the bill's headings I provided.

www.appropriations.senate.gov...

a reply to: underpass61

I cancelled my cable.

Is that what Faux News told you? Trump can do no wrong? Liberals are the devil?

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: underpass61

I cancelled my cable.

Is that what Faux News told you? Trump can do no wrong? Liberals are the devil?

Do you have any video or transcripts to prove your claim?
Remember, "Everyone was on board"

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: underpass61

I cancelled my cable.

Is that what Faux News told you? Trump can do no wrong? Liberals are the devil?

I stopped watching/listening to ALL talking heads.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: underpass61

I cancelled my cable.

Liberals are the devil?

Don’t need to hear that from Fox News, it’s common knowledge.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

LOL My God those do nothing!!! As suspected.

No mention at all about eliminating the Asylum Claim Rights when crossing illegally at points not designated official ports of entry. Crossing Illegally is the biggest problem. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

a reply to: WingDingLuey

Wrong. Read it again. At 5000 (right now 8500 are coming through per day) all border encounters, including those that entered illegally, are turned back around. You don't like the 5000 number? Send the Senate an acceptable number, when they mark-up the bill with their changes and send it back.

What? The House Republicans refuse to do that?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: WingDingLuey

Wrong. Read it again. At 5000 (right now 8500 are coming through per day) all border encounters, including those that entered illegally, are turned back around. You don't like the 5000 number? Send the Senate an acceptable number, when they mark-up the bill with their changes and send it back.

What? The House Republicans refuse to do that?

Highlight those parts so everybody can actually see. 😃

Nothing eliminates illegal crossings from claiming asylum. 😃

And nothing prevents illegal crossings from happening. 😃

AND, it says it's at Presidential discretion, not mandatory. 😃

a reply to: WingDingLuey

Highlight those parts so everybody can actually see.

Highlight? No.

Nothing eliminates illegal crossings from claiming asylum.

How do the Republicans propose to eliminate illegal crossings from claiming asylum?

AND, it says it's at Presidential discretion, not mandatory.

Jezz, maybe you do need certain things highlighted for you! There is a discretionary limit, set at 4000, and a mandatory limit set at 5000 for 7 days or 8500 in one day. Right now there are 8500 a day.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: WingDingLuey

Wrong. Read it again. At 5000 (right now 8500 are coming through per day) all border encounters, including those that entered illegally, are turned back around.

Wrong.

It's at the discretion of the Homeland Secretary.

Also, it's STILL allowing at least 5K illegals in per day.

That's not securing the border.