Re: Job Offer

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/3/12/voters-oppose-deportations-of-undocumented-immigrants-regardless-of-their-job-or-years-in-the-usOn Sat, 22 Mar 2025 17:48:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 19:53:18 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5198497-venezuela-tren-de-aragua-trump-deportations/On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 15:29:40 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:

>

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 16:30:07 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 09:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 03:56:44 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>

It beats me why anyone has a problem with getting rid of illegal
members of terrorist outfit. At any rate, it appears that the
President does has the power to do what he did.

>
Because our government only functions effectively if everyone in
involved follows the rules.  Breaking the rules intentionally by our
elected and appointed officials is the way to a dictatorship, chaos
and eventual ruin.
>
As for Trump having the power to impound congressionally approved
funding, we've been here before.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_of_1974>
The supreme court has already ruled that the president does not have
the right to impound congressionally approved funds. 
>
(March 14, 2025)
"President Trump Actively Destroys the Rule of Law He Claims to Be
Restoring"
<https://democrats-appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/president-trump-actively-destroys-rule-law-he-claims-be-restoring>

>
Democrats say so, anyway...

>
Probably true.  Most Republicans seem to be uncertain as to what to
support, advocate, endorse, or say.  They'll probably follow the party
line.  The Democrats are no better and will probably do the same.  The
likely winner is the one who makes the fewest mistakes.  The Democrats
seem to believe that doing nothing is the way to make fewer mistakes.
>

Who are these "illegal members of terrorist outfit" that you mention?

>
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5198497-venezuela-tren-de-aragua-trump-deportations/
>

The only terrorists I can find are rioters of January 6, 2021.  Just
to clarify, showing up to a protest march with a gun, is sufficient
for me to be considered a terrorist.

>
Perhaps...  depends on what you dom with it.

>
You didn't answer my question.  Who is the "anyone" that is having
difficulty controlling the "illegal members of terrorist outfit(s)"?

>

The people who oppose getting them out of the country.  Here's some..
https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/3/12/voters-oppose-deportations-of-undocumented-immigrants-regardless-of-their-job-or-years-in-the-us

>
I'll try again.  You initially wrote:
>
"It beats me why anyone has a problem with getting rid of illegal
members of terrorist outfit."
>
I then asked.  I then asked who are these "illegal members of
terrorist outfit(s)?".  You replied that they are undocumented
immigrants.

I think I referenced Tren de Aragua. If I didn't, I'll do so now.

Are they all illegal? 

I believe that's the plan. There may have been some mistakes.

Are they all terrorists? 

Not all of them. Some are just illegals.

Some illegals have committed crimes and I don't believe they should be
turned loose under any circumstances, bail or no bail.

You does

the Dogue determine which are legal, illegal, terrorist, or victims of
a computer error?  Is the Dogue even trying?  Is there any due process
or appeal?

The "due process" is part of the problem  Many were caught and
released without being vetted, They were given "court dates" years
into the future knowing it would never happen. That makes their legal
status questionable. Other's snuck in.

You replied with a link to a "think tank" called Data for Progress":
<https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2025/3/12/voters-oppose-deportations-of-undocumented-immigrants-regardless-of-their-job-or-years-in-the-us>
<https://www.statistics.gov.hk/wsc/IPS064-P3-S.pdf>
I read the article and found that they are a left leaning (Progressive
and possibly Democrat) organization conducting a survey to determine
what voters think of the deportations.

Yes they are far left. I posted that group as a reply to your question
as to who has a problem with deporation of illegals. In my opoinion,
they are a bunch of fruitcakes.

 >They are using a "web panel

survey" system.  They didn't provide much info on how they selected
their 1,189 "likely voters".  I do see some indications that there was
some cherry picking and that ALL the data is supplied by the
respondent and not verified.  Among the features is "The sample was
weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender,
education, race, geography, and recalled presidential vote."  I don't
know what that means since the weights were not tabulated.  I read it
as tweaking the result to correspond to expectations.  That should be
enough for now.
>
I consider this survey to have been tweaked, of questionable value and
probably inaccurate.  So, how does this survey relate to "anyone"
having difficulties getting rid of illegal members of terrorist
outfit(s)"?  It doesn't relate at all, unless you want to accuse the
people running the survey of being illegal or terrorists in some
manner.  Or, maybe you would prefer that the country be run by a
for-hire opinion poll organization?

I wouldn't believe anything Data for Progress says except that they
want to stop the deporations. There are other groups and individuals
who seek to stop deporations. I originally posted that I don't
understand why people oppose that. You asked who did?

--
C'est bon
Soloman