AG Jeff Sessions - “everyone that enters the country unlawfully is subject to being deported."

[Steelfoot]

A good beginning will be the roundup and deportation of all critters called ManWell, HaySoos, PaidRow and HoeSay.

Surnames like that contaminate America.

Know what we mean?

 

[basquebromance]

we're not building a wall because we hate.

we're not deportin folks because we hate.

THIS IS AMERICA. WE'RE ENFORCING. OUR. LAWS.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

All these filthy illegals have learned to CLAIM they were brought here by their parents. And they never have any proof. All illegals should be deported. That's what the law says.

Sessions on DREAMers: 'Everyone that Enters the Country Unlawfully Is Subject to Being Deported' - Breitbart

april 23 2017 STEPHANOPOULOS: The president said to the Associated Press that the dreamers should rest easy. He’s not going after the dreamers. That’s his policy. Is it the policy of the Justice Department?

SESSIONS: Homeland Security has primary jurisdiction there. Their first and strongest priority, no doubt about it, is the criminal element that we have in our country that have come here illegally. They’re focusing primarily on that. There is no doubt The president has sympathy for young people brought here at early ages.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So they can rest easy?

SESSIONS: Well we’ll see. I believe that everyone that enters the country unlawfully is subject to being deported. However, we’ve got — we don’t have the ability to round up everybody and there is no plans to do that. But we’re going to focus first as the president has directed us, on the criminal element and we have got to get that under control.

FYI-there is proof of when they were brought here as a child, through when they were registered at a school

Who gives a shit when they came here? That's on their parents, blame them.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

A good beginning will be the roundup and deportation of all critters called ManWell, HaySoos, PaidRow and HoeSay.

Surnames like that contaminate America.

Know what we mean?

I'm from Chile originally, you have a problem with the stock of people who discovered this land mass having spanish surnames or something?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Columbus was hired by the Spaniards.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

No they don't you idiot. Only citizens have constitutional rights. Note the first seven words of the constitution.

The SCOTUS has ruled that they do, that doesn't mean they have the right to be here, but you can't deny an illegal charged with a crime due process anymore than you could for a citizen.

The Supreme Court has no authority to write laws, The constitution says "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states." Until congress writes a law giving rights to illegals or the states amend the constitution to give rights to illegals - they have none.!

You are a legal ignoramus.

They have the authority to interpret the Constitution (Marbury V. Mason Madison) .

Star Chamber

Free men would nullify MvM. First, judicial review had nothing to do with Marbury's case against Madison. So it was obiter dictum and therefore not legally binding. Second, SCROTUS committed the logical fallacy of petitio principii when it interpreted the Constitution as giving it the power to interpret the Constitution. Third, if there had been any validity to the Court's usurpation of power, they would have been exercising it from the very beginning in 1789, instead of waiting until 1803. Only slavish wimps who like to get pushed around accept SCROTUS's veto power over the people's laws. That branch of government has always been just another layer of political-elitist tyranny.

So the intent of the founders just doesn't matter? Good to know.

This all started when you tried to argue that there is a Constitutional right for an alien to enter and/or remain in the United States, still waiting on that one.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

The Americas were not discovered by Brits, Steel foot. You folks never had the conqueror spirit the Spanish did.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I'm from Chile originally, you have a problem with the stock of people who discovered this land mass having spanish surnames or something?

You will be happier back there with your own kind. Know what we mean?

Lol....you're a moron. You wouldn't be here without the Spanish.

 

[Steelfoot]

"I'm from Chile originally, you have a problem with the stock of people who discovered this land mass having spanish surnames or something?"

You will be happier back there with your own kind. Know what we mean?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

"I'm from Chile originally, you have a problem with the stock of people who discovered this land mass having spanish surnames or something?"

You will be happier back there with your own kind. Know what we mean?

You stupid fuck...I heard you the first time.

 

[GaryDog]

All these filthy illegals have learned to CLAIM they were brought here by their parents. And they never have any proof. All illegals should be deported. That's what the law says.

Sessions on DREAMers: 'Everyone that Enters the Country Unlawfully Is Subject to Being Deported' - Breitbart

april 23 2017 STEPHANOPOULOS: The president said to the Associated Press that the dreamers should rest easy. He’s not going after the dreamers. That’s his policy. Is it the policy of the Justice Department?

SESSIONS: Homeland Security has primary jurisdiction there. Their first and strongest priority, no doubt about it, is the criminal element that we have in our country that have come here illegally. They’re focusing primarily on that. There is no doubt The president has sympathy for young people brought here at early ages.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So they can rest easy?

SESSIONS: Well we’ll see. I believe that everyone that enters the country unlawfully is subject to being deported. However, we’ve got — we don’t have the ability to round up everybody and there is no plans to do that. But we’re going to focus first as the president has directed us, on the criminal element and we have got to get that under control.

View attachment 122894

You're probably one of these morons who thinks a household budget is comparable to a national budget, aren't you?

 

[GaryDog]

we're not building a wall because we hate.

we're not deportin folks because we hate.

THIS IS AMERICA. WE'RE ENFORCING. OUR. LAWS.

Really? Is that why we not only tolerate but ENGAGE IN extraordinary rendition, spying on our own citizens, drone-striking countries with whom we're not engaged in armed conflict, etc.?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Go back to Britain, Steelfoot. You don't belong on my land mass.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Spaniard Pride

 

[GaryDog]

Go back to Britain, Steelfoot. You don't belong on my land mass.

Are you referring to those who crossed the Bering Strait?

First Americans

 

[basquebromance]

If Trump doesn't get Wall built he loses much of base. If he PICKS A GRATUITOUS FIGHT ON THE WALL & THEN CAVES ON THE WALL, heaven help him.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Go back to Britain, Steelfoot. You don't belong on my land mass.

Are you referring to those who crossed the Bering Strait?

First Americans

No....but they belong here more than Steelfoot does.

 

[GaryDog]

Go back to Britain, Steelfoot. You don't belong on my land mass.

Are you referring to those who crossed the Bering Strait?

First Americans

No....but they belong here more than Steelfoot does.

And you, by your own definition.

 

[SavannahMann]

The SCOTUS has ruled that they do, that doesn't mean they have the right to be here, but you can't deny an illegal charged with a crime due process anymore than you could for a citizen.

The Supreme Court has no authority to write laws, The constitution says "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states." Until congress writes a law giving rights to illegals or the states amend the constitution to give rights to illegals - they have none.!

You are a legal ignoramus.

They have the authority to interpret the Constitution (Marbury V. Mason Madison) .

Star Chamber

Free men would nullify MvM. First, judicial review had nothing to do with Marbury's case against Madison. So it was obiter dictum and therefore not legally binding. Second, SCROTUS committed the logical fallacy of petitio principii when it interpreted the Constitution as giving it the power to interpret the Constitution. Third, if there had been any validity to the Court's usurpation of power, they would have been exercising it from the very beginning in 1789, instead of waiting until 1803. Only slavish wimps who like to get pushed around accept SCROTUS's veto power over the people's laws. That branch of government has always been just another layer of political-elitist tyranny.

So the intent of the founders just doesn't matter? Good to know.

This all started when you tried to argue that there is a Constitutional right for an alien to enter and/or remain in the United States, still waiting on that one.

No this all started when you pretended I said that. You claimed I had made that assertion. I never said they did. It isn't my fault your reading comprehension is insufficient.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

No they don't you idiot. Only citizens have constitutional rights. Note the first seven words of the constitution.

The SCOTUS has ruled that they do, that doesn't mean they have the right to be here, but you can't deny an illegal charged with a crime due process anymore than you could for a citizen.

The Supreme Court has no authority to write laws, The constitution says "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states." Until congress writes a law giving rights to illegals or the states amend the constitution to give rights to illegals - they have none.!

You are a legal ignoramus.

They have the authority to interpret the Constitution (Marbury V. Mason Madison) .

Star Chamber

Free men would nullify MvM. First, judicial review had nothing to do with Marbury's case against Madison. So it was obiter dictum and therefore not legally binding. Second, SCROTUS committed the logical fallacy of petitio principii when it interpreted the Constitution as giving it the power to interpret the Constitution. Third, if there had been any validity to the Court's usurpation of power, they would have been exercising it from the very beginning in 1789, instead of waiting until 1803. Only slavish wimps who like to get pushed around accept SCROTUS's veto power over the people's laws. That branch of government has always been just another layer of political-elitist tyranny.

Lol so now you're arguing against centuries old stare decisis? Ya good luck with that.

Stare decisis is for RINOs.