- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bondi responds! Boasberg gonna cry!
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
I am sure it was an honest miss on not responding to the last statement, “And i am assuming you took great exception to no “due process” or “oversight” taking place for the illegals Biden brought here illegally on planes to begin with”
Please enlighten us on how the government can “legally” fly illegal immigrants into the country. Isn’t that essentially being an accomplice?
Please enlighten us on how the government can “legally” fly illegal immigrants into the country. Isn’t that essentially being an accomplice?
1
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:11 pm to BCreed1
Lol. A simple translation of Bondis response is that the government pleads the 5th to your TRO and you can go f yourself if you continue to ask us any further questions on matter that the court no longer has jurisdiction over.
Remember this was a TRO and the actual suit has not been heard by a court ... The same with all the Democrat judges injunctions so far.
Remember this was a TRO and the actual suit has not been heard by a court ... The same with all the Democrat judges injunctions so far.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:12 pm to tigerfam2000
quote:
“And i am assuming you took great exception to no “due process” or “oversight” taking place for the illegals Biden brought here illegally on planes to begin with”
Your premise is faulty. There was due process and oversight available.
quote:
Please enlighten us on how the government can “legally” fly illegal immigrants into the country. Isn’t that essentially being an accomplice?
Biden's view of executive authority is smaller than what Trump is currently arguing, just FWIW.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Due process is a check on government intervention in our lives.
The deportees used no due process to enter the US illegally. Seems to me that deporting them, non-US citizens mind you, without due process is completely legal.
And btw, you can shove your due process up your arse.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Why do you keep doing this to yourself? I know you think you're right-all wrong people do. Have you sought help? There seriously may be something wrong with you.
The admin is certainly trying to act without any oversight or review.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:18 pm to Sid E Walker
quote:
The deportees used no due process to enter the US illegally.
Irrelevant to the discussion.
quote:
Seems to me that deporting them, non-US citizens mind you, without due process is completely legal.
iI is not, unless you create the Rube Goldberg scheme Trump's admin just did with TDA.
Illegal aliens on US soil, generally, have the right of due process. That is not a disputed fact.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Wait!
The admin is certainly trying to act without any oversight or review.
Are you even so much as hinting that the Judiciary has primacy over the EB in terms of foreign affairs management?
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
I notice this judge had no issue when Biden was ignoring immigration laws and letting anybody flood through our borders with little resistance, but as soon as Trump tries to enforce laws on the books and send people back where they came from it's a problem. Make it make sense.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:23 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Are you even so much as hinting that the Judiciary has primacy over the EB in terms of foreign affairs management?
I'm saying it appears they manufactured this into a "foreign affairs management" and are arguing their creativity can't be reviewed, and then hide behind "national security" for any review of their allegations behind the creativity.
My larger argument is you don't want the DEMs empowered with this when they reclaim the Presidency.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
Why there will be no judges to shop that will cock block a Dem President.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Irrelevant to the discussion.
Sure man, sure.
quote:
iI is not, unless you create the Rube Goldberg scheme Trump's admin just did with TDA.
Illegal aliens on US soil, generally, have the right of due process. That is not a disputed fact.
Now, say that again and please lose the “generally” qualifier.
Thanks.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:25 pm to teke184
quote:
So this is how you say “Go frick yourself” in legalese.
If you boil it down?
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
tell me why deporting gang members and criminals should not be allowed.
I never argued it shouldn't. I've stated the opposite ITT I believe
Then you agree that this judge overstepped his authority, and that HE is wrong?
You can't have it both ways.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The admin is certainly trying to act without any oversight or review.
I’m not sure the point then. The Biden admin certainly didn’t seek out oversight and review prior to acting. When that occurred they criticized the judge. I’m missing the difference.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Biden's view of executive authority is smaller than what Trump is currently arguing, just FWIW.
Please explain
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:32 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Illegal aliens on US soil, generally, have the right of due process. That is not a disputed fact.
It looked like CECOT processed them very well when they checked in.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Biden's view of executive authority is smaller than what Trump is currently arguing,
Because Biden was sure the bureaucracy, along with the judiciary, would make sure his agenda (Democrats) went as planned. Biden was never about protecting the US as Trump is. Biden was moving us into globalism. Trump, against every aspect of our government, is trying to save us from that.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:33 pm to teke184
quote:
So this is how you say “Go frick yourself” in legalese.
You are 1000000% correct
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
it's already been ruled on. by the supreme court. why ignore my post?
That ruling is not fully compatible with this scenario. There is leeway to create a distinction. Biggest difference is that there was no dispute that we were at once at war with the Germans.
What defines war, terrorism, or predatory invasion, according to the statute is to be determined by the president. Where's the leeway?
The statute gives no leeway for anyone else to make this determination, which is what this judge is attempting to do.
Posted on 3/19/25 at 1:34 pm to ShinerHorns
quote:
Bondi continues to kick arse. First with the Epstein files, then the JFK files, and now she’s roasting Boasberg. Trump continues to show he put the right people in charge. Keep crying libtard fricks
We are winning every single fukin day and its freakin glorious
Page 9 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News