Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How many Americans have to be raped because BOTH PARTIES want Open Borders & Amnesty?
Horseshit. I admitted nothing. This is another instance of your whore trying to divide the U.S. Why can't these people be released where they are? This is merely political shit that your whore thought that he could get away with.This news demonstrates how much this whore in the Oval Office is only a political prostitute and not the leader of the American People who has only our best interests in mind. This demonstrates once again why he is not fit for office.
Really? So what you're saying is that taking leftist rhetoric seriously and acting on it is not in the best interests of the American people? You're admitting that the things you say are bad for America, and that you say it knowing that?
Incidentally, why does your whore repeatedly attack Democrats in his speeches? I take it from this that he is only president of republicans, not all Americans.
Horseshit. You may not want to ACKNOWLEDGE that you admitted it, but you did.
And then you signaled surrender with your "You disagree with me! That MUST mean you're a Trump fan, because there CAN'T be any other reason!!!!"
They shouldn't be released AT ALL. Why don't YOU want them in YOUR city? What's the point of declaring yourself a "sanctuary city" if you get your panties all ruffled about actually acting as a sanctuary? What the fuck did you think "sanctuary city" MEANT, other than the standard "I'm so much better and more moral than you are, because look at the bullshit I'm saying?"?
WE aren't the ones who keep blathering like brain-damaged baboons about how they need to be given a free pass to wander around a country they're not supposed to be in in the first place. WE aren't the ones who keep preening ourselves on our wonderfulness for demanding that they be allowed to violate our laws with impunity. WE aren't the ones who have spent years trying to claim the moral high ground for a bunch of empty words about how welcome they were in our cities. YOU did. So why should WE have to put up with them and deal with them, instead of YOU?
This is merely political shit YOU tried to get away with, and are now having to own.
I think we can tell who the REAL whores here are, Lice. And I can't imagine what about yourself ever made you think you were any kind of actual American.
I am an "actual American" whatever that means in your addled little head. Born and raised in New Jersey, have a birth certificate and carry a passport issued by the United States. Are you an "actual American"? How so?
Your whore resides about 20 minutes from where I live, considering that they will close 395 so that your whore's caravan can buzz through with a clear highway. Everybody can, and has come to live here. Folks here in Northern Virginia are a law-abiding bunch, just working and caring for their families.
You assholes have spent years blathering to us about how you are "Christian," "morality," "American values," and "the sanctity of life," yet you are incapable of focusing on the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of the others of the world's great religions, and on the "American values" that allowed my ancestors and your's to come and prosper here. Your anger and cruelty toward the unfortunate show what you are.
I hope that if you are anywhere near the border, you are bringing food to those families in need and arranging comfortable accommodations for them.
BTW: nobody allows anyone to rape, murder, steal, swindle, etc., at will. Persons who do so are arrested.
Townhall.com ^
If the liberal attitude toward immigration and a host of other issues could be summed up with just one saying, it would be this one: “good for thee, but not for me.”
Safely tucked away inside their think tanks, tenured academic positions, lilly-white suburban enclaves, and ESPECIALLY behind their carefully crafted WALLS, it’s easy for liberals to virtue-signal about how the rest of us should be “compassionate” and agree to welcome every migrant who takes a notion to come to the United States. But when it comes to their own personal lives, their “money” is almost never anywhere in the vicinity of their big fat jabbering pie holes.
In other words, just like with the degree of charitable contributions from people all-too-eager to spend YOUR money, liberals are big fat hypocrites.
Such was the case last week when President Donald Trump brilliantly proposed - in a masterful troll job that may very well exceed all of his previous troll jobs - that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) transport illegal border-crossers to … wait for it ... sanctuary cities. Sure, it’ll sadly probably never happen, and likely the only reason Trump brought it up was to do exactly what it did - expose liberal hypocrisy. But even so, you’d think liberals would be ALL OVER the notion, right? This should be so EASY, given their worldview, so why not just call Trump’s bluff and say “bring them on in?” I mean, even allowing for the typical degree of liberal hypocrisy, the very definition of “sanctuary city” means that those in charge of designating their cities as such must want them to be, you know, a SANCTUARY for illegal immigrants. The more the merrier, they’re always saying, yet when the bad orange man proposes giving them what they supposedly want, right in their own backyards, they look that gift horse in the mouth like it’s got three eyes.
It’s almost like they think Mexico and Central America aren’t sending their best, or something.
Senator Amy Klobuchar accused Trump of “literally using human beings as pawns in a political game.” If that was the case, it was a checkmate move, Mr. President. Actress Alyssa Milano called the idea “sick and twisted.” Rep. Adam “Pencil-Neck” Schiff called it a “hare-brained scheme.” Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro waxed eloquent about “the cruelty of this administration,” because apparently the definition of “cruelty” is matching liberals up with the reality of their absurd utopian fantasies. CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin accused the Trump administration of treating illegals like a “pestilence to spread around the country,” which still begs the question: if they love them so much why would they care?
And then there was Cher, who did a Trump-prompted stark 180 on mass immigration by wondering via Twitter why Los Angeles and California, a city and state that aren’t “taking care of” their “own” should bring in and “take care of more.” This was a woman who, less than two years ago mind you, begged anyone who could to “take a dreamer” into their home. It’s hard to know how long it’ll be before “red-pilled Cher” issues the obligatory profuse apology, but for today at least it’s nice to see a ray of common sense pierce even the most brainwashed of souls.
There were plenty more where those came from, all perfectly summed up by Trump Deputy Director of Communications Matt Wolking, who tweeted: “Seeing left-wing media folks who advocate for open borders lose their minds because immigrants will bring violence and crime to their cities is ... quite a sight.”
Indeed. It reminds me of Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s now legendary question to Jorge Ramos last October when the Univision anchor was traveling with the first migrant caravan.
“How many of these migrants are you taking in personally into your home and are supporting once they get into the United States?” Carlson asked Ramos.
“I think that’s a great question and that’s precisely the kind of question that people like you ask when you don’t want to understand that this has nothing to do with individuals,” Ramos responded. After an awkward back and forth, Carlson asked him if he would simply take in “three” migrants, a question Ramos dodged yet again because he CLEARLY wasn’t about to take any of the migrants he supposedly cares so much about into his sprawling, walled (because of course it is) mansion. They might get the carpets dirty, after all.
To his credit, San Jose, California Mayor Sam Liccardo is the only liberal non-hypocrite in America right now. That’s because he offered to take any illegal immigrants President Trump would transfer to his city: “[Donald Trump] plans to release detained immigrants to [San Jose]??” Liccardo tweeted Friday. “We welcome any families willing to endure such extraordinary hardships and to take such tremendous risks to be a part of our great country.”
Liccardo’s non-hypocrisy, on this issue at least, stands in stark contrast to the rest of his ideological brethren. Liberals want to take your money and choose where to spend it, but don’t want to give it themselves. Liberals want walls for their mansions and their neighborhoods, but none for America. Liberals want armed guards and even guns for themselves, but would disarm ordinary Americans whose lives apparently aren’t as “valuable” as theirs.
And as Trump masterfully exposed, they want endless immigration from the Third World, but not anywhere near where they live.
------------
If socialism is so grand, why are Guatemalans coming here instead of going to Venezuela?
If all of these morons who declare themselves spokespersons for Jesus and insist on calling the U.S.A. a "Christian nation," would step up to the plate and care for the stranger as Jesus taught, there would be no need for a "sanctuary city" because every city would be one.
All religions are contributing to the welfare of these seekers of refuge. One of the reasons stated for the massacre of Jewish people who were praying in Pittsburgh was that Jewish people, a minority in this country, had set up an organization to help these refugees. Christians and Muslims have also set up similar organizations for this purpose. Be mindful that each of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths has a period in the year that focuses on repentance and giving to others.
The obligation to care for the poor and refugees is deeply ingrained in the three Abrahamic faiths, and I think that other faiths agree. In our present world, we see people from the Middle East, from Africa, and from the Central America's fleeing from their homelands. Anyone of any country and any faith knows that it is a moral imperative to care for them.
If all of these morons who declare themselves spokespersons for Jesus and insist on calling the U.S.A. a "Christian nation," would step up to the plate and care for the stranger as Jesus taught, there would be no need for a "sanctuary city" because every city would be one.
All religions are contributing to the welfare of these seekers of refuge. One of the reasons stated for the massacre of Jewish people who were praying in Pittsburgh was that Jewish people, a minority in this country, had set up an organization to help these refugees. Christians and Muslims have also set up similar organizations for this purpose. Be mindful that each of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths has a period in the year that focuses on repentance and giving to others.
The obligation to care for the poor and refugees is deeply ingrained in the three Abrahamic faiths, and I think that other faiths agree. In our present world, we see people from the Middle East, from Africa, and from the Central America's fleeing from their homelands. Anyone of any country and any faith knows that it is a moral imperative to care for them.
We have no obligation to care for people who break into our homes. Lawbreakers. The Bible does speak about visiting people in prison. It does not speak about taking care of people who break into your home and take your stuff. Illegally.
I don't care about "The Bible." Jesus didn't write any of it. No one is breaking into your home. Such hysteria!
Trump’s too much of a pussy
The idea is so patently stupid that it was almost certainly a plan the fucking idiot himself came up with.
Yet you cannot explain why it is stupid. That must mean you are dumber than Trump, right?
You can’t fathom the dumbness of the idea so that must mean you’re either brain damaged or were born with a learning disability, right?
Sweetie.....let me tell you something.....we have 70 million US citizens euphoric this morning over the idea of illegals dumped in progressive cities!
The dumb are often easily amused.
Politicians designate cities to be sanctuary cities because they believe that the illegals are peaceful and productive people. They are better human beings than Americans. They work harder, commit no crimes, love their children more and neither drink nor use drugs.
Liberals should be glad to have Trump drop busloads of these wonderful people off in their cities. Didn't Nancy Pelosi say that her grandson was crying because he wasn't brown? Well, he can be buggered by lots of wonderful brown men.
Better than Trumpettes who spew hate & bigotry.
I`ll swap our Deplorables for illegals any day of the week. At least the illegals have some attractive women with full sets of teeth.
Well, the invaders are hardly attractive. Neither the men nor women are attractive. We know that the democrats are actively replacing the American population with one more obedient. This is the first suggestion that there are no attractive American women. Has there been a study? Do you have a link?I`ll swap our Deplorables for illegals any day of the week. At least the illegals have some attractive women with full sets of teeth.
Yeah, and walls don't work!If water is a basic building block for life, why do we build sea walls?
Correct. A human figures out how to get around them if they are there and what is on the other side is worth it.
Water and small minded organisms like Trump voters….can not.
By the time the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, there were 15 border walls in the world. Today, there are nearly 70.
Border walls help, they are a tool, ask the border patrol employees, not the fucking political leaders. Walls help.
But here's the real question, why are you guys on the left so desperate to keep the wall from being built ? Why don't all of you just come right out and be honest. You guys fight tooth and nail to stop ANY efforts that are intended to stop or slow the flow of illegals and refugee liars from coming here.
The Dimocrat party needs to make it clear instead of continuing the beating around the bush. We know you don't want secure borders, we know you want sanctuary cities, we know you want to provide illegals with taxpayers government resources, be honest about it, make a public announcement at the DNC convention.
Most illegals came here legally. Stats prove it.
But here’s the question. Since we know the wall will do nothing and there is no national emergency, can’t you just admit that this is about two things;
You don’t like brown people.
You think the wall will help you see fewer of them.
She claims to be an atheist. Most non believers are obsessed with instructing Christians on how to be a Christian, as if they know.We have no obligation to care for people who break into our homes. Lawbreakers. The Bible does speak about visiting people in prison. It does not speak about taking care of people who break into your home and take your stuff. Illegally.
I don't care about "The Bible." Jesus didn't write any of it. No one is breaking into your home. Such hysteria!
Sure you care about it, Lysistrata. You talk about Jesus, Christianity, Christians, pastors, evangelicals, fundies and the like INCESSANTLY. You're obsessed.
I never claimed to be an atheist, although there is nothing wrong with it, so you are a liar from the git-go. I find your brand of false, cheesy Jesus-less Christianity abhorant. It's an ignorant cult.
Bet you run after graham or jeffress or swaggart or some similar asshole. Bet you run after some "pastah."
If you have anything written by Jesus, you should share it.
Obsession with Christianity noted.
Again
If all of these morons who declare themselves spokespersons for Jesus and insist on calling the U.S.A. a "Christian nation," would step up to the plate and care for the stranger as Jesus taught, there would be no need for a "sanctuary city" because every city would be one.
All religions are contributing to the welfare of these seekers of refuge. One of the reasons stated for the massacre of Jewish people who were praying in Pittsburgh was that Jewish people, a minority in this country, had set up an organization to help these refugees. Christians and Muslims have also set up similar organizations for this purpose. Be mindful that each of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths has a period in the year that focuses on repentance and giving to others.
The obligation to care for the poor and refugees is deeply ingrained in the three Abrahamic faiths, and I think that other faiths agree. In our present world, we see people from the Middle East, from Africa, and from the Central America's fleeing from their homelands. Anyone of any country and any faith knows that it is a moral imperative to care for them.
We have no obligation to care for people who break into our homes. Lawbreakers. The Bible does speak about visiting people in prison. It does not speak about taking care of people who break into your home and take your stuff. Illegally.
I don't care about "The Bible." Jesus didn't write any of it. No one is breaking into your home. Such hysteria!
First you want to lecture us on how we need to "care for the stranger as Jesus taught', and then when you're told that's not what Jesus taught, you suddenly want to tell us how you don't care about the Bible. What you're really saying is that you want to congratulate yourself on how "superior" you are while forcing others to carry the burden of your self-satisfaction, and whatever excuse you think will work at the moment is fine. And if it contradicts what you said two minutes ago and makes you a shitbag hypocrite, that's okay too.
Tell me again: why should anyone even listen to you, let alone give a rat's ass if garbage like you doesn't approve of them?
But their is NOTHING ILLEGAL to send the invaders to ASSHOLE DEATHRAT TOWNS AND STATES that stated they WANT these people when BLUE STATES and cities do NOT want them....The DeathRAT cities and states need to STEP UP and not show THE REST OF THE COUNTRY THEIR HYPOCRISY AND LIES....certainly not good for the upcoming elections...perhaps those DeathRAT locals could raise property tax by 25% or install a NEW SALES TAX of at least that much to PAY for these invaders YOU want......Must suck to be you who is so partisan to show the rest of us how you people LIE!!!!!!Townhall.com ^
If the liberal attitude toward immigration and a host of other issues could be summed up with just one saying, it would be this one: “good for thee, but not for me.”
Safely tucked away inside their think tanks, tenured academic positions, lilly-white suburban enclaves, and ESPECIALLY behind their carefully crafted WALLS, it’s easy for liberals to virtue-signal about how the rest of us should be “compassionate” and agree to welcome every migrant who takes a notion to come to the United States. But when it comes to their own personal lives, their “money” is almost never anywhere in the vicinity of their big fat jabbering pie holes.
In other words, just like with the degree of charitable contributions from people all-too-eager to spend YOUR money, liberals are big fat hypocrites.
Such was the case last week when President Donald Trump brilliantly proposed - in a masterful troll job that may very well exceed all of his previous troll jobs - that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) transport illegal border-crossers to … wait for it ... sanctuary cities. Sure, it’ll sadly probably never happen, and likely the only reason Trump brought it up was to do exactly what it did - expose liberal hypocrisy. But even so, you’d think liberals would be ALL OVER the notion, right? This should be so EASY, given their worldview, so why not just call Trump’s bluff and say “bring them on in?” I mean, even allowing for the typical degree of liberal hypocrisy, the very definition of “sanctuary city” means that those in charge of designating their cities as such must want them to be, you know, a SANCTUARY for illegal immigrants. The more the merrier, they’re always saying, yet when the bad orange man proposes giving them what they supposedly want, right in their own backyards, they look that gift horse in the mouth like it’s got three eyes.
It’s almost like they think Mexico and Central America aren’t sending their best, or something.
Senator Amy Klobuchar accused Trump of “literally using human beings as pawns in a political game.” If that was the case, it was a checkmate move, Mr. President. Actress Alyssa Milano called the idea “sick and twisted.” Rep. Adam “Pencil-Neck” Schiff called it a “hare-brained scheme.” Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro waxed eloquent about “the cruelty of this administration,” because apparently the definition of “cruelty” is matching liberals up with the reality of their absurd utopian fantasies. CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin accused the Trump administration of treating illegals like a “pestilence to spread around the country,” which still begs the question: if they love them so much why would they care?
And then there was Cher, who did a Trump-prompted stark 180 on mass immigration by wondering via Twitter why Los Angeles and California, a city and state that aren’t “taking care of” their “own” should bring in and “take care of more.” This was a woman who, less than two years ago mind you, begged anyone who could to “take a dreamer” into their home. It’s hard to know how long it’ll be before “red-pilled Cher” issues the obligatory profuse apology, but for today at least it’s nice to see a ray of common sense pierce even the most brainwashed of souls.
There were plenty more where those came from, all perfectly summed up by Trump Deputy Director of Communications Matt Wolking, who tweeted: “Seeing left-wing media folks who advocate for open borders lose their minds because immigrants will bring violence and crime to their cities is ... quite a sight.”
Indeed. It reminds me of Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s now legendary question to Jorge Ramos last October when the Univision anchor was traveling with the first migrant caravan.
“How many of these migrants are you taking in personally into your home and are supporting once they get into the United States?” Carlson asked Ramos.
“I think that’s a great question and that’s precisely the kind of question that people like you ask when you don’t want to understand that this has nothing to do with individuals,” Ramos responded. After an awkward back and forth, Carlson asked him if he would simply take in “three” migrants, a question Ramos dodged yet again because he CLEARLY wasn’t about to take any of the migrants he supposedly cares so much about into his sprawling, walled (because of course it is) mansion. They might get the carpets dirty, after all.
To his credit, San Jose, California Mayor Sam Liccardo is the only liberal non-hypocrite in America right now. That’s because he offered to take any illegal immigrants President Trump would transfer to his city: “[Donald Trump] plans to release detained immigrants to [San Jose]??” Liccardo tweeted Friday. “We welcome any families willing to endure such extraordinary hardships and to take such tremendous risks to be a part of our great country.”
Liccardo’s non-hypocrisy, on this issue at least, stands in stark contrast to the rest of his ideological brethren. Liberals want to take your money and choose where to spend it, but don’t want to give it themselves. Liberals want walls for their mansions and their neighborhoods, but none for America. Liberals want armed guards and even guns for themselves, but would disarm ordinary Americans whose lives apparently aren’t as “valuable” as theirs.
And as Trump masterfully exposed, they want endless immigration from the Third World, but not anywhere near where they live.
------------
If socialism is so grand, why are Guatemalans coming here instead of going to Venezuela?
Townhall is overwhelmingly pro-Trump so naturally they would say that. Trump's plan was political retaliation against sanctuary cities. That is not allowable. The fact that DHS' own attorneys would counsel Trump against this is proof that what Trump was or is contemplating is illegal. Congress has not authorized this either.
Public policy is not about retaliating against your political enemies. All of these questions are red herrings. Designed to divert attention from the real questions. Talk about exposing hypocrisy, I can remember when Republicans were the pro-family party. Yet they are willing to deport and separate a father from his American wife and children. Or a mother from her American husband and children. Republicans claim to be pro-military but they are willing to separate a spouse from their American military spouse.
I`ve been happily married for 36 years. Just WTF are you babbling incoherently about anyway?I`ll swap our Deplorables for illegals any day of the week. At least the illegals have some attractive women with full sets of teeth.
Why do I suspect that your problem with women has more to do with none of them letting you anywhere near them, teeth or no?
I will happily accept 100 illegals if we can just ship you where they came from in exchange.
The down ticket includes members of the House.If these stories of illegals are true, the would effect the down ticket.Well, there is another reason that Dems give sanctuary. It's to build up the Democrat VOTE. That's the only reason I oppose the idea of dumping illegals into the laps of sanctuary cities.There is no drama here, just cheap political tricks by the Democrats that have harm the country and created a humanitarian crisis at the border all to try to prevent the President from keeping his promise to build the border fence. In 2013, Chuck Schumer proposed to do all the same things Trump wants to do when Schumer proposed Senate bill S. 744; Chuck wanted to spend billions of dollars to build border fencing and billions more to buy surveillance equipment to make it a smart fence and all the immigration reforms Trump wants came from Schumer's bill. Obama supported it. Clinton supported it and expressed her sorrow it hadn't passed the House in her 2014 book, Hard Choices. Schumer claimed his bill would reduce illegal immigration across our southern border by at least 90%, and every Democrat in the Senate voted for it, but the bill died in the House.
There is no drama here at all, just cheap political tricks from the Democrats that are hurting everyone. It is just and fair that the Democrats who created this problem should bear the full burden of it. All of the illegals who have to be released should be sent to New York and San Francisco and all the other sanctuary cities the Democrats have created for no other reason than to try to embarrass the President.
As I pointed out before, who cares? Those cities and states vote Democrat anyway!
Who the fuck cares if California elects more mayors, city council members, etc.? Answer: No one with an IQ above room temp!
There is no express immigration clause in our federal Constitution. All foreign nationals in the US should have a federal id. for civil purposes.By proposing to send migrants to sanctuary cities, President Trump pulled the curtain back on Democratic leadership, showing their hypocrisy
But releasing undocumented immigrants into sanctuary cities isn’t any more morally odious than sabotaging America’s health-care system, subjecting hundreds of thousands of American-raised immigrants to the threat of deportation, or shuttering the federal government for weeks on end in a fit of pique. In fact, Trump’s new gambit is much less objectionable from a moral standpoint. After all, if one rejects his racist (and empirically baseless) presumptions about the effect that undocumented immigrants have on urban life, then he is essentially threatening to provide asylum-seekers with free transportation to cities that are currently in need of more labor, and which have proved to be especially accommodating to America’s newcomers.
As far as this president’s hostage-taking threats go, that’s a rather benign proposition.
Trump’s Sanctuary-Cities Threat Is His Latest Bid to Govern by Sabotage
