Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Real Deal...
57 views
Skip to first unread message
Keyser Soze
Sep 5, 2017, 7:09:49 PM9/5/17
to
Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure
borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have
legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that
everybody plays by the rules.
But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about.
This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in
our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge
allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in
their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to
this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not
know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides
English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply
for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.
Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to
write legislation that would have told these young people – our young
people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve
been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to
college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and
earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked
Congress to send me such a bill.
That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented,
driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely
because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift
the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could
continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so
based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial
discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike,
because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and
it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to
this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some
800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and
went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.
But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest
young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because
they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want
to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and
otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if
our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a
Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t
know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?
Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a
political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or
complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t
threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through
no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away
anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s
softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a
disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the
uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t
lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise
anybody’s wages.
It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to
common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and
Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to
do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its
responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of
Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by
those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the
majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of
moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.
Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a
people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we
treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who
we are as a people – and who we want to be.
What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where
our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our
fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all
of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of
us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most
cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has
traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately
reach that more perfect union.
- - Barack Obama
borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have
legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that
everybody plays by the rules.
But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about.
This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in
our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge
allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in
their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to
this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not
know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides
English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply
for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.
Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to
write legislation that would have told these young people – our young
people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve
been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to
college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and
earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked
Congress to send me such a bill.
That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented,
driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely
because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift
the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could
continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so
based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial
discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike,
because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and
it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to
this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some
800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and
went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.
But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest
young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because
they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want
to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and
otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if
our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a
Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t
know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?
Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a
political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or
complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t
threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through
no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away
anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s
softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a
disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the
uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t
lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise
anybody’s wages.
It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to
common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and
Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to
do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its
responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of
Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by
those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the
majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of
moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.
Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a
people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we
treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who
we are as a people – and who we want to be.
What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where
our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our
fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all
of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of
us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most
cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has
traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately
reach that more perfect union.
- - Barack Obama
Mr. Luddite
Sep 5, 2017, 7:32:33 PM9/5/17
to
Congress got around to establishing laws governing dreamers.
He also acknowledges that it never happened on his watch.
Seems to me that Trump is forcing the issue, giving Congress 2 years to
get off their asses and pass some legislation. It is their
responsibility and obligation, not that of the POTUS.
Keyser Soze
Sep 5, 2017, 8:58:50 PM9/5/17
to
his wanting to kill off everything he can of his predecessor, and, of
course, to play to his hard-right base.
If the hard righties in Congress don't help the Dreamers, Trump can and
will point to them as the reason why these people are being deported.
But no one decent will believe that. Trump himself isn't decent; he's an
ignorant pig.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 5, 2017, 9:27:33 PM9/5/17
to
let's consider what he just did.
A group of right-wing AG's were about to file a lawsuit (today) that
claimed Obama's Executive Order/Executive Action that created DACA was
illegal and unconstitutional. Obama based it on a shaky legal premise of
"prosecutorial discretion". Many legal beagles believe that was a
stretch and the right-wing AGs stood a good chance of winning.
If, as you claim, that the outcome Trump wants, he could have done
nothing and allowed the courts take over. No skin off his back.
Instead, he took action, repealing the DACA but delaying any action for
two years in order to allow Congress to take up the issue and create new
legislation as the Constitution calls for. He had to play to his base
of course but did so with consideration to the moral aspects of the
issue and the law. It's the assholes in Congress, both parties, that
should be put on public display for their incompetence and lack of spines.
Meanwhile, there's a bunch of left-wing AG's who were ready to sue to
declare the action of the courts had it gone that way as being
un-Constitutional in an attempt to keep DACA on the books.
So, here's what's bizarre about all of this. Righties think Obama
overstepped his authority and are ready to sue. Lefties think Trump
overstepped his authority as well in repealing what Obama had done by
overstepping his authority.
waynebatr...@hotmail.com
Sep 5, 2017, 10:33:51 PM9/5/17
to
On 6 Sep 2017 01:51:48 GMT, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>I know about the state AGs, but we aww talking Trump here.
===
Aww your oxygen tanks running low again, or maybe just hitting the
sauce a wee bit?
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
>I know about the state AGs, but we aww talking Trump here.
===
Aww your oxygen tanks running low again, or maybe just hitting the
sauce a wee bit?
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Bill
Sep 6, 2017, 1:02:25 AM9/6/17
to
Go to Mexico and get caught more than 40 miles from the border, you go to
jail, and when you leave they keep your car and everything you had. They
do not put you one welfare.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 7:01:31 AM9/6/17
to
On 9/5/2017 9:51 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
>
Given the circumstances and the issue many, including some on the left,
feel that Trump did the right thing. We are, after all, a nation
governed by laws. Trump's action corrects an unlawful action by Obama
who freely admitted several times that he did not have the
constitutional authority to do what he did. He also underscored the fact
that his action was intended to be temporary. In fact, the "D" in DACA
stands for "Deferred".
Trump corrected an illegal action but with some compassion, allowing
some time for Congress to amend immigration laws to allow at least some
dreamers to stay in the USA.
Of course most of the liberal media doesn't take the time or make an
effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
> I know about the state AGs, but we aww talking Trump here.
>
> https://flic.kr/p/YeYmJZ
>
>
Given the circumstances and the issue many, including some on the left,
feel that Trump did the right thing. We are, after all, a nation
governed by laws. Trump's action corrects an unlawful action by Obama
who freely admitted several times that he did not have the
constitutional authority to do what he did. He also underscored the fact
that his action was intended to be temporary. In fact, the "D" in DACA
stands for "Deferred".
Trump corrected an illegal action but with some compassion, allowing
some time for Congress to amend immigration laws to allow at least some
dreamers to stay in the USA.
Of course most of the liberal media doesn't take the time or make an
effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
John H
Sep 6, 2017, 7:36:05 AM9/6/17
to
Keyser Soze
Sep 6, 2017, 7:51:21 AM9/6/17
to
to "the law," integrity, compassion, or anything that might be construed
as for the public's good. Trump has no interest or belief in the law -
just look at his pardon of his fellow scumbag, Joe Arpaio.
Hell, Trump didn't even have the balls to make the announcement himself.
Instead, he sent out his toady attorney general, Jeff Sessions, the
anti-black, anti-Semitic, proponent of eugenics.
I do, however, think it mildly humorous that you go on and on and on
defending and giving cover to Trump on this and many other issues. Puts
you in some interesting hateful right-wing company, not that I think you
are in any way that way.
John H
Sep 6, 2017, 9:23:09 AM9/6/17
to
On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 07:51:17 -0400, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>On 9/6/17 7:01 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
snippage
>On 9/6/17 7:01 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
>>
>>
>> Given the circumstances and the issue many, including some on the left,
>> feel that Trump did the right thing. We are, after all, a nation
>> governed by laws. Trump's action corrects an unlawful action by Obama
>> who freely admitted several times that he did not have the
>> constitutional authority to do what he did. He also underscored the fact
>> that his action was intended to be temporary. In fact, the "D" in DACA
>> stands for "Deferred".
>>
>> Trump corrected an illegal action but with some compassion, allowing
>> some time for Congress to amend immigration laws to allow at least some
>> dreamers to stay in the USA.
>>
>> Of course most of the liberal media doesn't take the time or make an
>> effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
>> trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
>>
>
>
>Sorry, but I don't believe Trump did what he did for any reasons related
>to "the law," integrity, compassion, or anything that might be construed
>as for the public's good. Trump has no interest or belief in the law -
>just look at his pardon of his fellow scumbag, Joe Arpaio.
>
>Hell, Trump didn't even have the balls to make the announcement himself.
>Instead, he sent out his toady attorney general, Jeff Sessions, the
>anti-black, anti-Semitic, proponent of eugenics.
>
>I do, however, think it mildly humorous that you go on and on and on
>defending and giving cover to Trump on this and many other issues. Puts
>you in some interesting hateful right-wing company, not that I think you
>are in any way that way.
Told you, Luddite. Enlightenment pisses off anyone who knows all.
>>
>> Given the circumstances and the issue many, including some on the left,
>> feel that Trump did the right thing. We are, after all, a nation
>> governed by laws. Trump's action corrects an unlawful action by Obama
>> who freely admitted several times that he did not have the
>> constitutional authority to do what he did. He also underscored the fact
>> that his action was intended to be temporary. In fact, the "D" in DACA
>> stands for "Deferred".
>>
>> Trump corrected an illegal action but with some compassion, allowing
>> some time for Congress to amend immigration laws to allow at least some
>> dreamers to stay in the USA.
>>
>> Of course most of the liberal media doesn't take the time or make an
>> effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
>> trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
>>
>
>
>Sorry, but I don't believe Trump did what he did for any reasons related
>to "the law," integrity, compassion, or anything that might be construed
>as for the public's good. Trump has no interest or belief in the law -
>just look at his pardon of his fellow scumbag, Joe Arpaio.
>
>Hell, Trump didn't even have the balls to make the announcement himself.
>Instead, he sent out his toady attorney general, Jeff Sessions, the
>anti-black, anti-Semitic, proponent of eugenics.
>
>I do, however, think it mildly humorous that you go on and on and on
>defending and giving cover to Trump on this and many other issues. Puts
>you in some interesting hateful right-wing company, not that I think you
>are in any way that way.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 10:05:02 AM9/6/17
to
others who are on record of calling their President a "Pig".
Trump's action is logical, legal and corrects a controversial action by
Obama who, again, freely admitted that he did not have the authority to
make what became DOAC permanent or a "law". He acknowledged it was
temporary and was intended to give time for Congress to act in writing
legislation that could be made into law. It's ironic that Trump has
basically done the same thing that Obama did except he put a timetable
on when Congress needs to take action. I'd call that the action of a
chief executive as opposed to Obama who just kicked the can down the
road with no accountability.
I know you will ignore me when I say again that I am not defending or
giving cover to Trump. I don't think or operate that way. I am
watching, listening and evaluating what he is doing or trying to do with
both an open mind and an eye on the law. BTW, his pardon of Joe Arpaio
is consistent with the law. Arpaio was found guilty of contempt for
refusing to obey a controversial court order that was not
constitutionally tested. A presidential pardon does not constitute a
"not guilty" record. A pardon is granted under some circumstances when
someone is found *guilty*. In any comparison, Arpaio's pardon pales in
significance to some of the pardons given by former presidents including
Obama, Bush and Clinton.
Tim
Sep 6, 2017, 10:33:13 AM9/6/17
to
9:05 AMMr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
Actions are more indicative of someone's intent, not the opinions of
others who are on record of calling their President a "Pig".
Trump's action is logical, legal and corrects a controversial action by
Obama who, again, freely admitted that he did not have the authority to
make what became DOAC permanent or a "law". He acknowledged it was
temporary and was intended to give time for Congress to act in writing
legislation that could be made into law. It's ironic that Trump has
basically done the same thing that Obama did except he put a timetable
on when Congress needs to take action. I'd call that the action of a
chief executive as opposed to Obama who just kicked the can down the
road with no accountability.
I know you will ignore me when I say again that I am not defending or
giving cover to Trump. I don't think or operate that way. I am
watching, listening and evaluating what he is doing or trying to do with
both an open mind and an eye on the law. BTW, his pardon of Joe Arpaio
is consistent with the law. Arpaio was found guilty of contempt for
refusing to obey a controversial court order that was not
constitutionally tested. A presidential pardon does not constitute a
"not guilty" record. A pardon is granted under some circumstances when
someone is found *guilty*. In any comparison, Arpaio's pardon pales in
significance to some of the pardons given by former presidents including
Obama, Bush and Clinton.
....
others who are on record of calling their President a "Pig".
Trump's action is logical, legal and corrects a controversial action by
Obama who, again, freely admitted that he did not have the authority to
make what became DOAC permanent or a "law". He acknowledged it was
temporary and was intended to give time for Congress to act in writing
legislation that could be made into law. It's ironic that Trump has
basically done the same thing that Obama did except he put a timetable
on when Congress needs to take action. I'd call that the action of a
chief executive as opposed to Obama who just kicked the can down the
road with no accountability.
I know you will ignore me when I say again that I am not defending or
giving cover to Trump. I don't think or operate that way. I am
watching, listening and evaluating what he is doing or trying to do with
both an open mind and an eye on the law. BTW, his pardon of Joe Arpaio
is consistent with the law. Arpaio was found guilty of contempt for
refusing to obey a controversial court order that was not
constitutionally tested. A presidential pardon does not constitute a
"not guilty" record. A pardon is granted under some circumstances when
someone is found *guilty*. In any comparison, Arpaio's pardon pales in
significance to some of the pardons given by former presidents including
Obama, Bush and Clinton.
Very well thought and said, Richard. Thank you!
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 10:53:49 AM9/6/17
to
"Trumpster". It's in his DNA. :-)
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 6, 2017, 11:01:06 AM9/6/17
to
>Of course most of the liberal media doesn't take the time or make an
>effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
>trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
It is sort of like why there is no big media push to rename all of the
>effort to explain all this, just like they rarely mention the corruption
>trial of Senator Menendez that starts today. He's a Democrat after all.
Robert Byrd schools, government buildings, roads etc.
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 6, 2017, 11:19:17 AM9/6/17
to
>Sorry, but I don't believe Trump did what he did for any reasons related
>to "the law," integrity, compassion, or anything that might be construed
>as for the public's good. Trump has no interest or belief in the law -
>just look at his pardon of his fellow scumbag, Joe Arpaio.
Trump is just knee jerking for his base, just like Obama did.
>to "the law," integrity, compassion, or anything that might be construed
>as for the public's good. Trump has no interest or belief in the law -
>just look at his pardon of his fellow scumbag, Joe Arpaio.
I don't really agree with Trump's immigration policy. I would kick out
the criminals but hard working immigrants are what keeps the economy
going. Those snowflakes in California are not going to pick
strawberries and they are certainly are not coming out to work in the
sun here in Florida, not even in the trades that pay far more than
agriculture.
I also agree that the Obama band aid needed to be addressed by
congress. If this forces that, it was worth doing.
Bear in mind, congress has worse polling than Trump. It is inaction
like this that makes that understandable. The Obama filibuster proof
congress still was not interested in immigration reform.
If I was king, ICE would be part of the IRS.
It should be all about taxes.
Pay and stay. Duck em and fuck em.
I am far more concerned with abuses of the H1B program bringing in
people who displace middle class workers than I am about laborers that
come in to do work nobody here wants to do.
Tim
Sep 6, 2017, 12:15:29 PM9/6/17
to
9:53 AMMr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
Maybe. But Harry will just respond calling me (and others) a
"Trumpster". It's in his DNA. :-)
...
"Trumpster". It's in his DNA. :-)
Don't forget "rightie". That kinda goes with it too...
Keyser Soze
Sep 6, 2017, 7:02:18 PM9/6/17
to
pass a reasonable law for the "Dreamers." From what I have seen of Trump
so far, he's just looking to push the blame on someone (thing) else.
Bill
Sep 6, 2017, 8:26:30 PM9/6/17
to
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 8:44:00 PM9/6/17
to
Keyser Soze
Sep 6, 2017, 8:45:58 PM9/6/17
to
fact, to pass decent legislation for the issue of immigrants but, of
course, the Repubs were having none of it because...Obama.
Keyser Soze
Sep 6, 2017, 9:07:04 PM9/6/17
to
refuses to read.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 9:29:33 PM9/6/17
to
focused on casting blame on everyone but herself for her election loss
and now in her recently published book, "What Happened", she points her
finger of blame on her old pal, Bernie.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 6, 2017, 10:14:53 PM9/6/17
to
> Bernie is an asshole...I’d never vote for him.
>
She thinks she's the Terminator. "I'll be back".
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 12:58:21 AM9/7/17
to
questionable EO. This is not a left right thing. You have as many
union democrats fighting immigration as redneck republicans.
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 7:15:26 AM9/7/17
to
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 7:17:53 AM9/7/17
to
office because of his criminal activities and Pence can do no more than
be a caretaker until the 2020 elections.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 7:59:20 AM9/7/17
to
What's it been now, over a year with multiple Congressional committees,
special prosecutors, the FBI and others searching for *anything* they
can hang on Trump that is illegal? Next, they'll be looking for unpaid
parking tickets.
Then there's ol' Rachel spinning yarn after yarn every night on MSNBC,
followed by the Grandfather of the Progressive Liberal movement and
acknowledged socialist, Lawrence O'Donnell, trying desperately to
connect Trump to Russia, Russia, Russia. They are starting to run out
of new theories. Maybe they should look out the window and see the sun
shining once in a while.
Oh ... forgot ... In her new book Hillary also points her finger of
blame on (of all people) Joe Biden and your Messiah, Barack Obama for
her election loss. I guess nothing is sacred to her, not even her own
party members.
Tim
Sep 7, 2017, 7:59:30 AM9/7/17
to
6:17 AMKeyser Soze
....
And what so-called "criminal activities", Harry?
Your fantasies are amazing and amusing
And what so-called "criminal activities", Harry?
Your fantasies are amazing and amusing
Tim
Sep 7, 2017, 8:02:32 AM9/7/17
to
"Maybe they should look out the window and see the sun
shining once in a while. "
If they did, they might burst into flames.
shining once in a while. "
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 9:06:25 AM9/7/17
to
judge what he may or may not find. I don't have confidence in the
Congressional committees investigating because the Repubs control those
committees.
As more is revealed, one can expect new theories.
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 9:07:59 AM9/7/17
to
Trump et al are going to be charged with obstruction. Obstruction is a
criminal activity.
Tim
Sep 7, 2017, 9:23:26 AM9/7/17
to
8:06 AMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
The Special Counsel is taking his time, as he should. It is premature to
judge what he may or may not find. I don't have confidence in the
Congressional committees investigating because the Repubs control those
committees.
As more is revealed, one can expect new theories.
....
judge what he may or may not find. I don't have confidence in the
Congressional committees investigating because the Repubs control those
committees.
As more is revealed, one can expect new theories.
What do you mean "take time?" Why should that matter. You don't "take time" to jump to conclusions of your fancy at any given moment.
"Take time" indeed...
justan
Sep 7, 2017, 9:25:09 AM9/7/17
to
Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> Wrote in message:
0
As is erasing emails and destroying the equipment they were stored
on. Whatever did she have to hide?
Other criminal activity ,
likely.
--
x
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
As is erasing emails and destroying the equipment they were stored
on. Whatever did she have to hide?
Other criminal activity ,
likely.
--
x
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 9:31:50 AM9/7/17
to
you can figure it it. I'm not the special counsel and I am free to jump
to whatever conclusions I want. Hey, you believe in the bible...that
requires a leap of faith that has nothing to do with evidence.
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 9:32:43 AM9/7/17
to
found anything prosecutable.
When do your kids make parole?
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 9:47:32 AM9/7/17
to
has and is hiring to conduct his "investigation".
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 9:50:07 AM9/7/17
to
been willing to prosecute her because of their political "connections".
Hillary created quite a web over the years, like a good little spider.
Its Me
Sep 7, 2017, 10:11:43 AM9/7/17
to
justan
Sep 7, 2017, 10:12:08 AM9/7/17
to
other criminal acts. The Clinton family are sleezeballs.
Political power has it's privileges.
Its Me
Sep 7, 2017, 10:14:49 AM9/7/17
to
On Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 9:31:50 AM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
> On 9/7/17 9:23 AM, Tim wrote:
> >
> > 8:06 AMKeyser Soze
> > - show quoted text -
> > The Special Counsel is taking his time, as he should. It is premature to
> > judge what he may or may not find. I don't have confidence in the
> > Congressional committees investigating because the Repubs control those
> > committees.
> >
> > As more is revealed, one can expect new theories.
> > ....
> >
> > What do you mean "take time?" Why should that matter. You don't "take time" to jump to conclusions of your fancy at any given moment.
> >
> > "Take time" indeed...
> >
>
> Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does, that is, if
> you can figure it it. I'm not the special counsel and I am free to jump
> to whatever conclusions I want.
It's good that you understand your statements have no basis in fact.
> On 9/7/17 9:23 AM, Tim wrote:
> >
> > 8:06 AMKeyser Soze
> > - show quoted text -
> > The Special Counsel is taking his time, as he should. It is premature to
> > judge what he may or may not find. I don't have confidence in the
> > Congressional committees investigating because the Repubs control those
> > committees.
> >
> > As more is revealed, one can expect new theories.
> > ....
> >
> > What do you mean "take time?" Why should that matter. You don't "take time" to jump to conclusions of your fancy at any given moment.
> >
> > "Take time" indeed...
> >
>
> Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does, that is, if
> you can figure it it. I'm not the special counsel and I am free to jump
> to whatever conclusions I want.
BTW, what does "figure it it" mean?
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 10:41:22 AM9/7/17
to
more easily puke.
waynebatr...@hotmail.com
Sep 7, 2017, 10:54:59 AM9/7/17
to
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT), Its Me <345...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does, that is, if
>> you can figure it it. I'm not the special counsel and I am free to jump
>> to whatever conclusions I want.
>
>It's good that you understand your statements have no basis in fact.
>
>BTW, what does "figure it it" mean?
===
Harree has been making a lot of typos and brain farts lately, not what
you'd expect from someone with his self proclaimed writing and editing
skills. It certainly calls into question his declining mental and
physical health.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
wrote:
>> Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does, that is, if
>> you can figure it it. I'm not the special counsel and I am free to jump
>> to whatever conclusions I want.
>
>It's good that you understand your statements have no basis in fact.
>
>BTW, what does "figure it it" mean?
Harree has been making a lot of typos and brain farts lately, not what
you'd expect from someone with his self proclaimed writing and editing
skills. It certainly calls into question his declining mental and
physical health.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 11:21:11 AM9/7/17
to
there was a dreamer law that died in committee. It has always been
clear that the EO was questionable. I see Nancy in on TV saying the
democrats "will not rest" until they pass this dreamer law. I know why
she looks so tired all the time now. She hasn't slept in 9 years.
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 11:35:07 AM9/7/17
to
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 09:31:47 -0400, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does,
After watching Ken Starr, it seems apparent they do anything they can
>Perhaps you should study up on what a special counsel does,
to perpetuate their position, trying to find something that justifies
their phony baloney job. In the end, bear in mind, Clinton survived
even after admitting perjury and obstruction of justice, being
disbarred, along with paying a settlement of almost a million dollars.
It is also likely that Nixon would have survived too but he had the
sense of concern about the fate of the country enough to just leave
quietly. Trump is not likely to take that path, nor was Clinton.
The only long term effect of these witch hunts is to further divide
the country. We never recovered from watergate and the subsequent
"investigations" have only driven the wedge in deeper.
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 11:41:48 AM9/7/17
to
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 09:32:40 -0400, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>Hillary has been under investigation for years...so far, no one has
>found anything prosecutable.
Ken Starr just ignored the Hillary connection in the real estate
>Hillary has been under investigation for years...so far, no one has
>found anything prosecutable.
deals, in fact Bill blamed her for most of it and she owned all of the
Rose law firm shenanigans. It was just not in the scope of his
investigation.
There has never been a special prosecutor looking directly at Hillary
and she certainly hopes there never will be. If they look at all of
the election, email and SoS irregularities as closely as they are
looking at Trump right now Hillary will be in trouble.
Its Me
Sep 7, 2017, 11:46:30 AM9/7/17
to
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 11:50:23 AM9/7/17
to
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:41:18 -0400, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>> Really? How about criminal obstruction and purgery to hide her
>> other criminal acts. The Clinton family are sleezeballs.
>> Political power has it's privileges.
>>
>
>
>"Purgery..." the act of sticking your finger down your throat so you can
>more easily puke.
Not necessary when you are talking about the Clintons. A picture of
>> Really? How about criminal obstruction and purgery to hide her
>> other criminal acts. The Clinton family are sleezeballs.
>> Political power has it's privileges.
>>
>
>
>"Purgery..." the act of sticking your finger down your throat so you can
>more easily puke.
Hillary usually does it for me. ;-)
justan
Sep 7, 2017, 12:16:28 PM9/7/17
to
True North
Sep 7, 2017, 12:16:41 PM9/7/17
to
Tim
Sep 7, 2017, 2:50:44 PM9/7/17
to
Mr. Luddite
- show quoted text -
I am not so sure about that. I think it's more the case that nobody has
been willing to prosecute her because of their political "connections".
Hillary created quite a web over the years, like a good little spider.
. I thought there were no indictments against her because the prosecutors wanted to stay alive...
been willing to prosecute her because of their political "connections".
Hillary created quite a web over the years, like a good little spider.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 3:28:19 PM9/7/17
to
their millions of dollars worth.
John H
Sep 7, 2017, 3:38:31 PM9/7/17
to
to be insulting or is it just to demonstrate your denigration of the gender?
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 3:44:50 PM9/7/17
to
was opposed by both Dems and Republians and was shot down in the Senate.
It was tried again in 2013 with the same results. It's important to
note that opposition to the bill was bi-partisan in both cases.
waynebatr...@hotmail.com
Sep 7, 2017, 4:37:27 PM9/7/17
to
On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 15:38:28 -0400, John H <salmo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>Hee hee...that Justine is quite a gal.
>
>Are females some sort of lower species to you Donnie? Is referring to someone as a female supposed
>to be insulting or is it just to demonstrate your denigration of the gender?
===
I have reluctantly concluded that Don may not know any better.
wrote:
>>Hee hee...that Justine is quite a gal.
>
>Are females some sort of lower species to you Donnie? Is referring to someone as a female supposed
>to be insulting or is it just to demonstrate your denigration of the gender?
I have reluctantly concluded that Don may not know any better.
Keyser Soze
Sep 7, 2017, 5:14:39 PM9/7/17
to
On 9/7/17 4:37 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 15:38:28 -0400, John H <salmo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Hee hee...that Justine is quite a gal.
>>
>> Are females some sort of lower species to you Donnie? Is referring to someone as a female supposed
>> to be insulting or is it just to demonstrate your denigration of the gender?
>
> ===
>
> I have reluctantly concluded that Don may not know any better.
>
Anyone Don knows and likes is "any better" than any of your right-wing
> On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 15:38:28 -0400, John H <salmo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Hee hee...that Justine is quite a gal.
>>
>> Are females some sort of lower species to you Donnie? Is referring to someone as a female supposed
>> to be insulting or is it just to demonstrate your denigration of the gender?
>
> ===
>
> I have reluctantly concluded that Don may not know any better.
>
buddies here, buttwipe.
John H
Sep 7, 2017, 5:50:45 PM9/7/17
to
simply bullshit.
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 7, 2017, 8:26:21 PM9/7/17
to
Mr. Luddite
Sep 7, 2017, 9:14:50 PM9/7/17
to
concern that it may strengthen even more as it traverses the very warm
waters in it's path, I have to say I'd be a bit nervous right now if we
still had the properties in Florida. Even for you seasoned veterans
down there, I suggest that you guys don't take this too lightly. I am
sure you are not.
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 8, 2017, 12:34:15 AM9/8/17
to
tracking farther west. I guess the good news is it is weakening a
little. It will still be a Cat 4 when it gets to Florida tho. If the
Euro model is right, it will go over Cuba and that usually knocks a
little off of them but they also have it farther west. As long as it
stays out of the gulf I am not really worried but I do expect
something bad will happen. I am just not sure what it would be. We
have been picking stuff up and tying things down ... regular stuff.
I have plenty of water, generator and plenty of gas, at least for a
few days anyway. I still have the propane kit for the generator and
125 gallons in the ground but I have not installed the kit. The lady
at US Carb said it takes about an hour the first time someone does it.
It will be dual fuel after that.
We prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
True North
Sep 8, 2017, 10:18:21 AM9/8/17
to
On the other hand, in your case, I'll have to defer to Harry's profiling of y'all.... he seems to be...how do y'all put it.."spot on"!
Boating All Out
Sep 8, 2017, 10:34:29 AM9/8/17
to
In article <f1co6u...@mid.individual.net>,
no...@jose.com says...
> >> Bernie is an asshole...I?d never vote for him.
replace him with that Amarosa girl - or the Duck Dynasty
cracker.
Besides, the GOP might impeach Trump on unrelated charges
without Dem help. For cooperating with Pelosi and Schumer.
Consorting with the enemy.
Then poor irrelevant Hillary still has "the base" - like
Luddite and others here - on the defense, flailing away at
ghosts.
It's looking somewhat better for sane people.
no...@jose.com says...
>
> On 9/6/17 10:14 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
> >>
> >> You seem overly concerned with Hillary. Why, I don?t know. I?m not.
> On 9/6/17 10:14 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
> >>
> >> Bernie is an asshole...I?d never vote for him.
> >>
> >
> > She thinks she's the Terminator. "I'll be back".
>
> It's going to be really really interesting if Trump is forced out of
> office because of his criminal activities and Pence can do no more than
> be a caretaker until the 2020 elections.
Better to keep him twisting in the wind. The GOP might
> >
> > She thinks she's the Terminator. "I'll be back".
>
> It's going to be really really interesting if Trump is forced out of
> office because of his criminal activities and Pence can do no more than
> be a caretaker until the 2020 elections.
replace him with that Amarosa girl - or the Duck Dynasty
cracker.
Besides, the GOP might impeach Trump on unrelated charges
without Dem help. For cooperating with Pelosi and Schumer.
Consorting with the enemy.
Then poor irrelevant Hillary still has "the base" - like
Luddite and others here - on the defense, flailing away at
ghosts.
It's looking somewhat better for sane people.
justan
Sep 8, 2017, 11:10:20 AM9/8/17
to
True North <prince...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
You are a horrible judge of character and capability. Your passion
to be Harry's friend has clouded your judgement severely.
to be Harry's friend has clouded your judgement severely.
Keyser Soze
Sep 8, 2017, 11:15:23 AM9/8/17
to
as the attributes of others.
So, Justan, when do your kids make parole?
justan
Sep 8, 2017, 11:17:45 AM9/8/17
to
"Mr. Luddite" <nowa...@nowhere.net> Wrote in message:
I took down my flagpole, brought in most of the furniture from the
porches, bird feeder etc. Unfortunately there are houses under
construction nearby with the accompanying debris.
porches, bird feeder etc. Unfortunately there are houses under
construction nearby with the accompanying debris.
Mr. Luddite
Sep 8, 2017, 12:48:52 PM9/8/17
to
YKW. No point adding to his dossier.
Keyser Söze
Sep 8, 2017, 1:21:14 PM9/8/17
to
--
Posted with my iPhone 7+.
Keyser Soze
Sep 8, 2017, 1:38:23 PM9/8/17
to
John H
Sep 8, 2017, 2:37:24 PM9/8/17
to
John H
Sep 8, 2017, 2:38:07 PM9/8/17
to
John H
Sep 8, 2017, 2:38:52 PM9/8/17
to
gfre...@aol.com
Sep 8, 2017, 3:12:10 PM9/8/17
to
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:38:20 -0400, Keyser Soze <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>Fortunately, we got this snap of your flag before you pulled it down...
>
>http://tinyurl.com/y7vp4525
Quarantine?
>Fortunately, we got this snap of your flag before you pulled it down...
>
>http://tinyurl.com/y7vp4525
Keyser Soze
Sep 8, 2017, 3:14:38 PM9/8/17
to
bobhowar...@gmail.com
Sep 10, 2017, 7:54:05 PM9/10/17
to
On Tuesday, September 5, 2017 at 6:09:49 PM UTC-5, Keyser Soze wrote:
> Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure
> borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have
> legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that
> everybody plays by the rules.
>
> But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about.
> This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in
> our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge
> allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in
> their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to
> this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not
> know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides
> English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply
> for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.
>
> Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to
> write legislation that would have told these young people – our young
> people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve
> been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to
> college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and
> earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked
> Congress to send me such a bill.
>
> That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented,
> driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely
> because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift
> the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could
> continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so
> based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial
> discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike,
> because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and
> it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to
> this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some
> 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and
> went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.
>
> But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest
> young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because
> they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want
> to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and
> otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if
> our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a
> Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t
> know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?
>
> Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a
> political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or
> complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t
> threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through
> no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away
> anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s
> softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a
> disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the
> uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t
> lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise
> anybody’s wages.
>
> It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to
> common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and
> Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to
> do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its
> responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of
> Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by
> those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the
> majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of
> moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.
>
> Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a
> people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we
> treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who
> we are as a people – and who we want to be.
>
> What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where
> our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our
> fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all
> of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of
> us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most
> cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has
> traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately
> reach that more perfect union.
>
> - - Barack Obama
AND, if you don't think the way I do, I will cut your head off!!! Barry, you were not my president!!!
> Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure
> borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have
> legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that
> everybody plays by the rules.
>
> But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about.
> This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in
> our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge
> allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in
> their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to
> this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not
> know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides
> English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply
> for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.
>
> Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to
> write legislation that would have told these young people – our young
> people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve
> been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to
> college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and
> earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked
> Congress to send me such a bill.
>
> That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented,
> driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely
> because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift
> the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could
> continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so
> based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial
> discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike,
> because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and
> it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to
> this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some
> 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and
> went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.
>
> But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest
> young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because
> they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want
> to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and
> otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if
> our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a
> Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t
> know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?
>
> Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a
> political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or
> complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t
> threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through
> no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away
> anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s
> softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a
> disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the
> uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t
> lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise
> anybody’s wages.
>
> It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to
> common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and
> Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to
> do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its
> responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of
> Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by
> those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the
> majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of
> moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.
>
> Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a
> people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we
> treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who
> we are as a people – and who we want to be.
>
> What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where
> our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our
> fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all
> of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of
> us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most
> cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has
> traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately
> reach that more perfect union.
>
> - - Barack Obama
AND, if you don't think the way I do, I will cut your head off!!! Barry, you were not my president!!!
justan
Sep 10, 2017, 8:49:23 PM9/10/17
to
Keeping YKW like a mushroom is my goal. I don't need a mentally
unbalanced
gun totin whale stalking me. I imagine Peggie and
Deloras were creeped out when they found out he was stalking
them.
Tim
Sep 10, 2017, 9:41:10 PM9/10/17
to
Sep 8Keyser Soze
- show quoted text -
....
Mine was yellow with black pin striping.
http://www.usaflags.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/1/s/1st-cavalry-flag.jpg
What is yours Harry? Plain white?
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/white-flag-surrender-cuba.jpg
0 new messages