In The News
Jussie is now hated by his own cast
members. Good job..
https://www.tmz.com/2019/02/22/jussie-smollett-betrayed-empire-cast-fired-quit-liar-attack/
Quote: terapinedEB is just posting fake nonsense just to get a rise out of you
There is a word for that kind of poster in forums but we are not supposed to use it
T***L
So I can call someone a TROLL as long as I mask it? Cool.😀
I was under the impression that was not acceptable.
Quote: EvenBobUh Huh. Even the Chicago police superintendent
said it.
"Justice would be for the 36-year-old actor to apologize, admit what he did and “then be man enough to offer what he should offer up in terms of all the resources that were put into this.” Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson
He thinks just a slap on the wrist and
pay a fine and that's enough.
Sigh. This is the same department that arrested him and charged him with the most serious crime they could charge him with. And this is your response.
Quote: FinsRuleSigh. This is the same department that arrested him and charged him .
The superintendent of police said just
an apology was enough. I was accused
of making it up. I also heard a panel
of H-wood people say the same thing.
Quote: FinsRuleSigh. This is the same department that arrested him and charged him with the most serious crime they could charge him with. And this is your response.
I've seen a lot of instances of a more serious crime being charged initially and then the person being convicted of a lesser charge.
Chicago doesn't hold the only jurisdiction in this case due to the letter that was sent. Can you be charged for sending a hate letter to yourself?
Quote: MaxPenSo I can call someone a TROLL as long as I mask it? Cool.😀
I was under the impression that was not acceptable.
Depends.
Quote: EvenBobThe superintendent of police said just
an apology was enough. I was accused
of making it up. I also heard a panel
of H-wood people say the same thing.
He never said “an apology is enough”
Saying “the city of Chicago deserves an apology” DOES NOT mean that’s all the superintendent of police believes is needed.
Did you see the news conference? The city (black and white) is angry at him.
It is beyond me how you are allowed to post this.
I think one of Larry Nassar’s victims demanded an apology. I guess that means she was fine with him not going to jail. (SARCASM)
I think I deserve an apology for all the time I waste responding to this. But guess what, that doesn’t mean I don’t think you should be nuked.
Quote: RonCI've seen a lot of instances of a more serious crime being charged initially and then the person being convicted of a lesser charge.
Chicago doesn't hold the only jurisdiction in this case due to the letter that was sent. Can you be charged for sending a hate letter to yourself?
Serious question. Is sending a “hate letter” a crime? Obviously threatening someone is. But if I sent someone a random letter that said “I dislike white people”, has a crime been committed?
What a vulcan pussy.
Typical pussy response for a crime infested city full of dumb pussies who would rather see their kids shot dead than vote for a Republican Mayor.
Quote: Tanko"Johnson ended a Thursday news conference about the charges against Smollett by saying justice would be for the 36-year-old actor to apologize, admit what he did and “then be man enough to offer what he should offer up in terms of all the resources that were put into this.”
What a vulcan pussy.
Typical pussy response for a crime infested city full of dumb pussies who would rather see their kids shot dead than vote for a Republican Mayor.
Mask the profanity. Stop the personal insults. Realize that’s the END of the press conference. Not the entire press conference.
Grrrr
Quote: FinsRuleRealize that’s the END of the press conference. Not the entire press conference.
But it's not the end of their problems.
If that former ballerina Rahm Emanuel ran again, they'd re-elect him.
What exactly would this magical person do to solve everything?
Quote: FinsRuleSerious question. Is sending a “hate letter” a crime? Obviously threatening someone is. But if I sent someone a random letter that said “I dislike white people”, has a crime been committed?
'It's a serious federal crime to use the mail to threaten a person. It’s one of more than 200 postal crimes that Postal Inspectors investigate. These mailings may threaten a person's reputation or involve blackmail or extortion. Or it may be a direct act of coercion where the action is proposed to elicit a negative or fearful response. Threats are communicated attempts to inflict harm, fear, or some form of loss on another individual.
Postal Inspectors investigate extortion and blackmail when demands for ransoms or rewards are sent through the U.S. Mail. Inspectors also strictly enforce laws prohibiting mail that contains threats of kidnapping, physical injury, or injury to the property or reputations of others.
The United States defines and classifies threats based on how they are delivered and the likelihood that they will be acted upon. For instance, Federal law criminalizes specific true threats that are transmitted via the U.S. mail or in interstate commerce.
Or the mailing might be a hoax meant to scare the recipient. Either way, report such mailings to Postal Inspectors and keep the letters as evidence. Fortunately, these mailed threats are not frequent occurrences. But there's a newer version of threats that come through social media, online or by text.
It's called Cyberbullying. Some states criminalize cyber-bullying, which is any action transmitted through a computer or cell phone that elicits a harmful action. And it can be devastating if you are the target. No one wants to be on the receiving end of this, but we can only help if you let someone know it's going on. Tell someone if you or anyone you know is being bullied -- online or in person. No one should ever have to endure a bully. Don't let it happen to you. Report Cyberbullying."
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/the-inspectors/threatening-letters.html
I don't know all the elements that would need to be present to make it a crime...
Quote: FinsRuleThe thought that a republican mayor would solve all the problems in Chicago is hilarious.
What exactly would this magical person do to solve everything?
I don't think it is a Republican or Democrat Mayor thing...the levels of corruption and such require a complete makeover of most of the government in the city...and a whole lot more than that.
One person may get the ball rolling, but they will have to have a whole lot of support to actually get things done.
Quote: RonCI don't think it is a Republican or Democrat Mayor thing...the levels of corruption and such require a complete makeover of most of the government in the city...and a whole lot more than that.
One person may get the ball rolling, but they will have to have a whole lot of support to actually get things done.
Of course. A very reasonable opinion.
The city has a corruption problem and a violence problem. They are not related. The violence problem is worse.
Quote: FinsRuleThe thought that a republican mayor would solve all the problems in Chicago is hilarious.
What exactly would this magical person do to solve everything?
Don't worry, Chicago has a lot of guns, and some very fine people are saying that the more people are armed, the less crime there will be.
Quote: FinsRuleThe thought that a republican mayor would solve all the problems in Chicago is hilarious.
What exactly would this magical person do to solve everything?
Maybe reduce the murder rate by 60% as Guiliani did in NYC, following 20 devastating years of useless democrat Mayors.
In 1984, the crack epidemic in NYC was so bad, 14 year old girls trying to collect $5 for crack, were performing sex acts for $1.25. The NYPD knew where the crack houses were, but for some reason, they let them alone. A fed up Al Sharpton grabbed a bucket of red paint and a brush and walked through the streets painting red X's on the front doors of crack houses.
Mayor Koch, still did nothing, and the crack epidemic grew.
Koch was finally booted from office and replaced by Dinkins, who was just as useless.
In August, 1991, the Blacks in began a Pogrom against the Hasidic community in Crown Heights Brooklyn, where for three days and nights, they were allowed to terrorize and beat Jews to a pulp while the NYPD stood down.
This is Brooklyn, not Warsaw:
Dinkins finally allowed the NYPD to intervene after repeated requests by Deputy Commissioner Ray Kelly.
Kelly ended the Pogrom almost immediately, but sporadic assaults continued for weeks, culminating with the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum.
Despite the Pogrom, Dinkins still got 40% of the Jewish vote when he ran against Guiliani. Doubtful he got any from the Orthodox community.
Giuliani got 5% of the Black vote.
The very first day Guiliani took office, the NYPD began raiding all those crack houses that flourished under Koch and Dinkins.
Four years later, after Guiliani reduced the murder rate, largely ended the crack epidemic, and saved more Black lives than anyone since Abe Lincoln, he got 20% of the Black vote.
So yes. Some people would rather see their kids shot dead than vote Republican.
Quote: unJonHow many politics threads does this board need?
None, ideally.
Quote: FinsRuleHe never said “an apology is enough”.
He most certainly IMPLIED it and callers
to talk radio were livid about it yesterday.
"Johnson ended a Thursday news conference about the charges against Smollett by saying justice would be for the 36-year-old actor to apologize, admit what he did and “then be man enough to offer what he should offer up in terms of all the resources that were put into this.”
The 'and then' is important. He didn't
say 'and then go to prison', he said
and then pay some money for the
resources he wasted. Implying that
would be enough. That's certainly how
I and tons of others heard it. He's going
to pay for what he wasted whatever
happens, why structure your sentence
that way if you're calling for prison time
too.
Quote:It is beyond me how you are allowed to post this.
It's beyond me that you don't
get it..
Quote: unJonHow many politics threads does this board need?
Someone can nuke the whole thread if I had my way.
Maybe you should start an entertainment blog or something. See if you can give TMZ a run for their money.
Quote: EvenBobHe most certainly IMPLIED it and callers
to talk radio were livid about it yesterday.
"Johnson ended a Thursday news conference about the charges against Smollett by saying justice would be for the 36-year-old actor to apologize, admit what he did and “then be man enough to offer what he should offer up in terms of all the resources that were put into this.”
The 'and then' is important. He didn't
say 'and then go to prison', he said
and then pay some money for the
resources he wasted. Implying that
would be enough. That's certainly how
I and tons of others heard it. He's going
to pay for what he wasted whatever
happens, why structure your sentence
that way if you're calling for prison time
too.
It's beyond me that you don't
get it..
Apparently you’ve never watched an episode of law and order.
The police arrested and charged him with a felony.
Now, the prosecutor will try to get him to serve jail time.
The police wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars of man time on this. The chief of police probably cares more about that money that is out of his budget than the guy going to prison for a year.
It’s just such a ridiculous view to hold that the police want to go lightly on this.
The conservative leaning tribune praised him for his tough stance on this.
The city is pissed at Smollett.
Stick to rural Michigan news.
Quote: FinsRuleThe police arrested and charged him with a felony.
What does that have to do with the
superintendent's opinion that he
should just apologize and pay for
the resources he wasted. Once
he's found guilty, the sentencing
is up to the judge. He could very
well call for an apology and
restitution, stranger things have
happened.
Trump declared the emergency
that fed judges would be 'lining
up' to slap injunction after injunction
on it. It's been over a week and
so far, nada.
Under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, Congress gave the president broad power to determine what constitutes a national emergency.
“It’s an emergency under federal law because Trump said it is,” said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University professor of law and contributor to The Hill. “The National Emergencies Act has one conspicuous omission: It doesn’t define what an emergency is.”
16 states are filing lawsuits.
Turley said it will be hard for the 16 states to successfully argue that it’s unlawful for the president to pull funds from each of those areas for the purposes of building a wall.
“The president has identified as much as $8 billion in available funds,” Turley said. “Even if the challenge cuts that in half it’s almost the amount the president asked for originally.”
Meanwhile Trump has sent yet another
1000 troops to the border, under the
declaration. MAGA!
Seems legit.
I think the official logo for MAGA should be a big stack of money getting flushed down the toilet.
Quote: TigerWuan emergency that apparently didn't exist.
Yet Obama, Bush, Pelosi, Schumer all
called it a 'border crisis' many times
just a few years ago, and it's only
gotten worse.
Here they are saying exactly what
Trump is saying now. Crisis crisis crisis
Quote: EvenBobYet Obama, Bush, Pelosi, Schumer all
called it a 'border crisis' many times
just a few years ago, and it's only
gotten worse.
Nope.
Quote:Here they are saying exactly what
Trump is saying now. Crisis crisis crisis
Didn't build a wall, so they didn't need one. Mexico is paying for the wall.
Do you wanna buy a red Maggot hat?
Quote: EvenBobThe media was all saying before
Trump declared the emergency
that fed judges would be 'lining
up' to slap injunction after injunction
on it. It's been over a week and
so far, nada.
Under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, Congress gave the president broad power to determine what constitutes a national emergency.
“It’s an emergency under federal law because Trump said it is,” said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University professor of law and contributor to The Hill. “The National Emergencies Act has one conspicuous omission: It doesn’t define what an emergency is.”
16 states are filing lawsuits.
Turley said it will be hard for the 16 states to successfully argue that it’s unlawful for the president to pull funds from each of those areas for the purposes of building a wall.
“The president has identified as much as $8 billion in available funds,” Turley said. “Even if the challenge cuts that in half it’s almost the amount the president asked for originally.”
Meanwhile Trump has sent yet another
1000 troops to the border, under the
declaration. MAGA!
(Bolding above mine)
The bolded part is what will cause this to be unconstitutional. The money identified is NOT available. It's appropriated for the purposes it's out there for. It can't just be moved by the president or anyone else, because Art 1 of the Constitution assigns that right solely to Congress. He can declare all he wants, but there's no slush fund he can just pull money out of.
Quote: beachbumbabs
The bolded part is what will cause this to be unconstitutional.
Like Turley said, if he only gets half
the 8 mil, that's close to what he
wanted. This is deal making 101,
ask for much more than you need
to get what you really want. Hate
Trump's guts or don't, he does
know how to get what he wants.
Quote: rxwineNope.
So let me get this straight. It's been
a crisis for the last 15 years, Obama
and Bush and Pelosi and Schumer and
many others have said so. It's only
gotten worse and it's no longer a
crisis because Trump is president?
That really doesn't work as any kind
of argument, you know.
Quote: EvenBobSo let me get this straight. It's been
a crisis for the last 15 years, Obama
and Bush and Pelosi and Schumer and
many others have said so. It's only
gotten worse and it's no longer a
crisis because Trump is president?
If it was a crisis he would have declared an emergency on day one. Instead he waited TWO YEARS until Dems took the midterms to make a big political show out of it.
And I bet you were praising him when he said this last year:
"45 year low on illegal border crossings this year. Ice and Border Patrol Agents are doing a great job for our Country. MS-13 thugs being hit hard."
Your boy Trump is all over the place... haha... you can't even defend him because he contradicts himself from one sentence to the next.
Quote: EvenBobHate
Trump's guts or don't, he does
know how to get what he wants.
LOL no he doesn't.... He's a TERRIBLE businessman.
Quote: EvenBobLike Turley said, if he only gets half
the 8 mil, that's close to what he
wanted. This is deal making 101,
ask for much more than you need
to get what you really want. Hate
Trump's guts or don't, he does
know how to get what he wants.
No , you're not understanding me. He will get NONE of that 8 billiom, because he has no right to reprogram appropriations.
Quote: EvenBobSo let me get this straight. It's been
a crisis for the last 15 years, Obama
and Bush and Pelosi and Schumer and
many others have said so. It's only
gotten worse and it's no longer a
crisis because Trump is president?
That really doesn't work as any kind
of argument, you know.
They don't say it's gotten worse. They say numbers are the lowest in 40 years.
Quote: beachbumbabsNo , you're not understanding me. He will get NONE of that 8 billiom, because he has no right to reprogram appropriations.
My question would be since a good portion of that is allocated to the military and he plans on using the military for a good portion of building the wall, would that be considered acceptable? I have no idea how constrained these allocations are.
And the stats say it isn't worse.
Quote: beachbumbabsNo , you're not understanding me. He will get NONE of that 8 billiom,
In your opinion. There are sure a lot
of legal experts who say he'll get
all or a good portion of it, especially
the military money.
The wall is a last desperate gasp.
Quote: TigerWuIf it was a crisis
How come everybody who actually
goes down there and spends time
all say it's very much a crisis.
I'm sure none of you will read this,
it's chock full of indisputable facts
and numbers.
Yes, There Is A Crisis At The Border — The Numbers Show It
Illegal Immigration: Democrats and the mainstream press accuse President Donald Trump of manufacturing a crisis at the border. The numbers tell another story.
What they aren't telling you is border patrol agents apprehended more than 100,000 people trying to enter the country illegally in just October and November of last year. Or that that number is way up from the same two months the year before.
The Department of Homeland Security claims that about 20% of illegal border crossers make it into the country. Other studies, however, say border agents fail to apprehend as much as 50% of illegal crossers.
The Center for Immigration Studies looked at federal crime statistics. It found that noncitizens accounted for more than 20% of federal convictions, even though they make up just 8.4% of the population.
Democrats, it seems, want to label everything a crisis. We have a health care crisis. A clean water crisis. A "food desert" crisis. An infrastructure crisis. A homelessness crisis. Everything, that is, except for the very real, long-standing crisis posed by a porous border that each year lets in tens of thousands of illegals.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-crisis-at-the-border/
Quote: EvenBob
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-crisis-at-the-border/
You quoted an Op-ed from a far-right news outlet. Why should anyone take that seriously?
I'm sure you won't read this, it's chock full of indisputable facts and numbers:
"According to drug threat assessments from the Drug Enforcement Administration, the majority of the drugs that cross the southwest border are brought in through official ports of entry. This has been the case for years.... “In other words, a border wall would not target the most valuable drugs crossing the border,” Bier wrote."
"Terrorism has been repeatedly cited by White House officials as a specific concern about who enters the country along the southern border......Wallace refuted the claim, noting in an on-air fact check that most terrorists are stopped at airports."
"In a 2017 report, the State Department said there was “no credible evidence” indicating that international terrorist groups have established bases in Mexico or sent operatives into the U.S."
"That number is far lower than the more than 1.6 million people who were apprehended in fiscal year 2000, widely considered a peak year apprehensions at the border in recent decades. Since then, overall apprehensions have declined to current levels."
"There’s widespread agreement across the political spectrum that the immigration system is broken. But while the Trump administration has centered on national security, the current situation is an “asylum system crisis, rather than a border security crisis,” Capps said."
Source: PBS
"It comes as no surprise that the president used his State of the Union speech to demand funding for the border wall under the guise of a manufactured ‘crisis.’ In reality, the number of irregular border crossings, as reflected in Customs and Border Patrol’s arrest statistics, are the lowest they’ve been in decades."
"The real crisis is the instability in Central America which is forcing people to flee for their lives, coupled with the administration’s systematic attacks on these same vulnerable individuals."
Source: International Rescue Committee
"At a June 21, 2018, cabinet meeting, Donald Trump talked about “the illegal immigration crisis on the southern border.” But data coming from his own administration show there is no such crisis. This year, illegal cross-border migration is only about 11% higher than at the same point last year – and the administration said last year was the “lowest level” on record."
"The report reflected reality: Border Patrol apprehensions along the Southwest border plummeted by approximately 80%, from a high of over 1.6 million in FY 2000, to around 300,000 in FY 2017. (Apprehensions are considered a proxy for illegal entry, so the fewer apprehensions, the less illegal entry.)"
Source: Forbes
Quote: EvenBobYes, There Is A Crisis At The Border — The Numbers Show It
No one disagrees with this. Most people simply disagree that Trump turning our border into a crisis is what Makes America Great Again
Quote: EvenBobIllegal Immigration: Democrats and the mainstream press accuse President Donald Trump of manufacturing a crisis at the border. The numbers tell another story.
Are you really arguing over the difference between a 'crisis' and a 'manufactured crisis?' Perhaps the reason we have a crisis is because so many people like you and Trump care more about arguing over semantics instead of actually taking responsibility. He's had two years to do something about this border problem and so far all he's done is say he will build a wall while keeping the border open, allowing illegal immigrants to flood into the country.
Their statements are found in a three-page letter issued Jan. 8, the same night President Donald Trump addressed the nation from the Oval Office, and amid the longest federal government shutdown amid disputes over funding for portions of Trump's border wall.
The wall, the letter reads, "is a soundbite, not a cogent public policy position."
The document was signed by Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot, who also chairs the Southwest Border Sheriffs' Coalition.
Source
But law enforcement leaders in at least two border counties, including the sheriff who patrols McAllen, say the picture Trump is painting of the Texas borderlands is inaccurate.
Hidalgo County Sheriff J.E. “Eddie” Guerra, who is in charge of policing the largest and most populous county in the Rio Grande Valley, said that crime rates in his county are at record lows, and that illegal immigration has very little effect on the safety of residents. Meanwhile, Brewster County Sheriff Ronny Dodson, who is responsible for policing the largest county in Texas, said he doesn’t support the construction of a wall along any part of the 192-mile stretch of border in Brewster County, which includes Big Bend National Park.
“Because we’re on the border, the perception is that there’s murders every day and there’s shootings every day. Yet here in our county, we don’t have that going on. It’s very, very safe,” Guerra told the Observer.
Source
Quote: TigerWuYou quoted an Op-ed from a far-right news outlet. Why should anyone take that seriously?
So the sources and numbers quoted are
all lies? Whew, I'll sleep better tonight..
Thanks!
Quote: TomGTrump turning our border into a crisis
So just a few years ago Obama said
it was a crisis, and in the few years
that passed illegal crime has vanished,
nobody is dying from the drugs brought
over the border?
Really? That's the story you're going with?
Of course it's a crisis, this whole conversation
is silliness personified. It's what's the meaning
of 'is' all over again.
1) If there is a crisis/emergency at the border, why did Trump say this:
"45 year low on illegal border crossings this year. Ice and Border Patrol Agents are doing a great job for our Country. MS-13 thugs being hit hard."
2) If there is a crisis/emergency at the border, why did Trump wait two year before declaring it an emergency, if, as you said, other Presidents had been saying it for years?
Quote: TigerWuHere, EvenBob, answer these two questions, if you can:
1) If there is a crisis/emergency at the border, why did Trump say this:
Ask him, how would I know. The only
thing I do know is a crisis when I see one.
Just like Obama and Pelosi and Schumer
and Bush knew.
Quote: EvenBobSo the sources and numbers quoted are
all lies? Whew, I'll sleep better tonight..
Thanks!
"Even at the lower percentage, that means that 104,000 illegals made it into the country in 2018 alone.
Is that not a crisis at the border?"
Only 104,000?
"Pelosi and company also don't bother to mention the fact that there are already between 12 million and 22 million illegals — depending on which study you use — in the country today..."
....only a tiny fraction of which actually snuck across the physical border on foot.
Tell me again how a wall is going to keep out people who overstay their visas?
Tell me again how a wall is going to deport the 12-22 million illegal immigrants already in the country?
Whoever wrote that article is an idiot.
Past Presidents including Obama, Bush, and Reagan were talking about illegal immigration in general, NOT a physical wall along the southern border that would only affect a fraction of a percent of illegal immigrants.
In short, the wall is a waste of money. It's a pure ego move by Trump. If Republicans were serious about illegal immigrants, they would do something about the 12-22 million already in the country. They would do something to punish the business and corporations that knowingly employ illegal immigrants. But no, they don't really care about illegal immigrants. It's just a talking point to scare people, and you've fallen for it hook, line, and sinker.
