***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I wouldn’t leave my underaged relatives around you. And you, to my knowledge, haven’t been accused of anything.

The standard is different because I wouldn’t want to take chances. That’s enough for me to not do it. But it’s not enough for someone to preclude you from getting a job just because I wouldn’t leave my underage relatives around you.

You support people like Roy Moore. If I were your relative I wouldn't trust you at all. Disgusting post but par for the course for you.
 
You also stated in the same post that the parents took the risk so we shouldn't reward said risk so you obfuscated you original point by saying it was fine the kids were taken because they parents came here illegally and we dont want to reward that behavior:lol:

The risk I outlined was not the separation at the border. The risk I outlined was human trafficking, drug trafficking, etc.That’s why it is a difficult discussion. Many don’t survive the trip.

But reducing nuanced discussion to a sentence hot take for NT likes is silly. And it doesn’t, at all, accurately convey my stance on the issue. If you want to discuss undocumented immigration and illegal entry substantively I’m down.

But saying I don’t care about them is inaccurate. I care deeply. I think many in here disagree on the appropriate solution.
 
Not knowingly.

But I don’t think being under indictment is sufficient to preclude them from getting a job. A conviction, however, is. And I’m not sure you can legally ask someone about arrests and use that in hiring decisions.
Hypothetically, let’s say you did know about the indictment because it was a local man in your small town. He is responding to your search for a babysitter. He offers to do it.

How do you proceed?
 
Capture.JPG


giphy.gif
Not surprising. DWalk likes it when children are being taken advantage of.
The only way he'd champion for this harder is if they were being sexually abused.
Oh wait
In each of the past four years, 1,000 or more immigrant children who arrived at the southern U.S. border without their parents have reported being sexually abused while in government custody, according to federal records released Tuesday.

The data from the Department of Health and Human Services was made public by Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., before a congressional hearing on the Trump administration's policy of separating migrant families.

As NPR's John Burnett reported,

"The federal Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is in charge of caring for under-age immigrants, received more than 4,500 allegations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment between 2015 and 2018. The reporting begins under the Obama administration. Of those complaints, some 1,300 were serious enough to refer to the FBI, but an official says 'the vast majority' proved to be unfounded.

"Most of the assault allegations involved one minor abusing another. But 178 of the complaints were against staff at the shelters — in particular, youth-care workers who escort the children everywhere they go. The complaints range from inappropriate romantic relationships between children and adults, to touching genitals, to watching children shower."
It all makes sense now.
 
Hypothetically, let’s say you did know about the indictment because it was a local man in your small town. He is responding to your search for a babysitter. He offers to do it.

How do you proceed?

In that hypothetical I would tell him that we have decided to go with another candidate and thank him for his consideration.
 
Not surprising. DWalk likes it when children are being taken advantage of.
The only way he'd champion for this harder is if they were being sexually abused.
Oh wait

It all makes sense now.

Probably the worst NTer out right now. There was a time where taking advantage of minors was a bad thing across the board. Not with this guy, he will cape for Roy Moore until the end. Disgusting.
 
Just making a general point.
There is a distinct difference between caged kids during the Obama Administration and the Trump administration.

In the Obama Administration, child separation was an unfortunate biproduct of illegal immigration that often couldn’t be avoided.

In the Trump Administration however, child separation was not a biproduct. It was the goal.
Child separation was a policy, not an unfortunate biproduct. Specifically, it was a policy meant to function as a “deterrent.”
Illegal immigration prosecutions were drastically ramped up, thus increasing the number of children separated. The amount of immigration judges could not keep up with the number of prosecutions, resulting in lengthy delays and the hiring of immigration judges without any experience in immigration law. The Administration also struggled to keep records of child separations.


Child separation and kids in cages took place in both administrations but a closer looks reveals a stark difference in the administrations’ handling of it.
 
Why? Legally he’s innocent until proven guilty.

Because I think it would be negligent for me to make that hire. Within the strictures of your hypothetical.

In reality I wouldn’t go about hiring a babysitter that way. And if I take my child to daycare I would have no idea whether everyone hired had never been accused of sexual misconduct.
 
Reek? No. No way. Not buying the redemption arc until after the vote is cast and King Donald Joffrey Trump has his head on a pike.
 
Romney emptying his clip right now







Mitt showing the first actual sign of a spine out of anyone in the GOP during this ****show presidency

He doesn't have the memory of a goldfish or his tail tucked between his legs like his colleagues

#NeverForget

mitt%20romney%20donald%20trump%20dinner.jpg


Mitt%2BRomney%252BDonald%2BTrump%252BDinner%252BSecretary%2Bof%2BState%252BEmotional%2BIntelligence%252BAnxiety%252BRegret%252BBody%2BLanguage%2BExpert%252BBody%2BLanguage%252BNonverbal%252BSpeaker%252BKeynote%252BConsultant%252BLos%2BAngeles%252BLas%2BVegas%252BCalifornia%252BNYC%252BOrlando%252B2.png
 
romney > ___ for that.
good **** for standing up for what's right and being honest in a (what has sadly become a) traitorous party full of dishonesty.

real talk, he stuck his neck out. sad that we have to give props to something that should be a given but it is what it is.

romney is probably done politically after this as long as the GOP is how it is. smh.
 
romney > ___ for that.
good **** for standing up for what's right and being honest in a (what has sadly become a) traitorous party full of dishonesty.

real talk, he stuck his neck out. sad that we have to give props to something that should be a given but it is what it is.

romney is probably done politically after this as long as the GOP is how it is. smh.

He’s been done. Remember the CPAC un-invite? Lol
 


Mitt's having his 'maverick' moment rn, took some balls cause he's 100% gonna suffer for it politically but credit where credit is due tbf regardless of how I feel about him personally and politically.

Even if it's basically just upholding his constitutional oath but even that is still much much more than any of his colleagues are willing to do

You don't ever see folks putting their necks out or sacrificing their careers for the sake of their country over party anymore
 
Back
Top Bottom