Alcatraz

[ll74]

Bless your little heart.

So it's not working

Have you contacted the support team?

Have you properly notified everyone here orf your motivation to ignore?

 

[HisArpy]

Going to leave this here.

Hopefully it brings at least one person to their senses that prisoners are prisoners for a reason and giving them early release and/or comfortable lives and counseling doesn't change who they are.

 

[ll74]

Going to leave this here.

Hopefully it brings at least one person to their senses that prisoners are prisoners for a reason and giving them early release and/or comfortable lives and counseling doesn't change who they are.

He could've stabbed you. Thank goodness he only stabbed another undesirable

 

[Meekly_Anna]

Your hypotheticals are unrealistic. Why? Because you have NO FUCKING CLUE what you're talking about.

As a lawyer I've spent a LOT of time in jails and prisons over the past 30 some years. Inmates aren't "underfed." They're not "brutally punished" either. There is some crime and assault inside but those who are in prison are there because that's their nature and they will victimize anyone if given the chance.

Your other hypothetical inmate who gets counseling and support has a greater than 65% recidivism rate. Which means that 65+ of 100 will return to jail/prison within a year after VICTIMIZING some poor innocent person, often violently, in the commission of yet ANOTHER rape, or stabbing, or shooting, or robbery, or assault/battery.

In the end, your view is to coddle those who, upon release, once again brutalize the public because you have NO FUCKING CLUE about what really happens in the world except what you've been fed by a media shaping a narrative. A narrative which might end up with you crying in a courtroom as the perpetrator of a crime gets sentenced while you get to go home afterward to loss and grief.

Until you realize this, you're nothing more than a child throwing a temper tantrum because someone stole your lolipop.

You're not a lawyer, you're a liar or a shyster.
Lawyers have the task of using the rule of law to help their clients obtain justice. You are doing the opposite here.
I have no idea where you got your figures from, and I don't give a damn. They are wrong.

 

[HisArpy]

You're not a lawyer, you're a liar or a shyster.
Lawyers have the task of using the rule of law to help their clients obtain justice. You are doing the opposite here.
I have no idea where you got your figures from, and I don't give a damn. They are wrong.

You have no clue.

I was doxxed on this site, I am who I say I am.

Meanwhile, you've reverted to type where you lose the debate and instantly turn into a vile person slinging personal attacks against someone you dislike merely because they have the temerity to disagree with you.

Get a fucking clue little girl.

 

[Bray123]

You have no clue.

I was doxxed on this site, I am who I say I am.

Meanwhile, you've reverted to type where you lose the debate and instantly turn into a vile person slinging personal attacks against someone you dislike merely because they have the temerity to disagree with you.

Get a fucking clue little girl.

Why didn't you offer your advice to Mike Walz so he could keep his job after using an insecure free app to discuss military secrets?

 

[ll74]

You have no clue.

I was doxxed on this site, I am who I say I am.

You doxxed yourself on this site

 

[Meekly_Anna]

You have no clue.

I was doxxed on this site, I am who I say I am.

Meanwhile, you've reverted to type where you lose the debate and instantly turn into a vile person slinging personal attacks against someone you dislike merely because they have the temerity to disagree with you.

Get a fucking clue little girl.

Dear sir,
You have insulted me here several times without me ever doing anything to you, except of course disagreeing with you. A lawyer should be used to others not sharing his opinion. He should also be able to give professional answers and express his opinion eloquently. You have done none of that here. You are spreading your opinion disguised as "facts" that are not facts, and combining this with defamation and insults against me.
That's why I don't think you're a lawyer. And if I am wrong and you are one, then you are a disgrace to your profession. A lawyer should know that the internet is not a legal vacuum.

Yours faithfully
Anna

 

[Rightguide]

Why do you need new prison space in America when Trump has promised you he will deport all those who 'invaded'?
(And you didn't need a capital 'P' for 'Prison' by the way. "New prison space is needed" is fine).

Because we need space to house them while we comply with your embedded communist judges who think illegals have all of the rights you do.

 

[ll74]

Because we need space to house them while we comply with your embedded communist judges who think they have all of the rights you have.

What rights do they have, according to the Constitution?

Please explain

 

[Rightguide]

What rights do they have, according to the Constitution?

Please explain

Damn little compared to a citizen.

 

[HisArpy]

Dear sir,
You have insulted me here several times without me ever doing anything to you, except of course disagreeing with you. A lawyer should be used to others not sharing his opinion. He should also be able to give professional answers and express his opinion eloquently. You have done none of that here. You are spreading your opinion disguised as "facts" that are not facts, and combining this with defamation and insults against me.
That's why I don't think you're a lawyer. And if I am wrong and you are one, then you are a disgrace to your profession. A lawyer should know that the internet is not a legal vacuum.

Yours faithfully
Anna

I don't have to be "nice." I can be as crude as I choose and you can either like it or lump it.

Please note; that's not an insult or an opinion, it's a statement of fact. You taking it as an insult is yet another example of your clueless and childlike demeanor and outlook.

You can believe what you choose, it doesn't change the facts at all. What it does do is hamper your ability to comprehend what is going on around you to the point that the world you live in doesn't resemble actual reality.

Good luck in your future endeavors.

 

[ll74]

Damn little compared to a citizen.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[LeahWill]

Because we need space to house them while we comply with your embedded communist judges who think illegals have all of the rights you do.

So I guess this means you can't even begin to deport anyone until you have all the new prisons ready to hold the deportees in whilst sorting out the issues with the communist judges? Is that it? What is the timeframe for building sufficient capacity do you think?

(Oh, and as my profile mentions I am British, so it is not 'our' communist judges who will be involved in this it will be 'your' communist judges. And well done with that 'capital letter' issue that you had. Much better).

 

[ll74]

So I guess this means you can't even begin to deport anyone until you have all the new prisons ready to hold the deportees in whilst sorting out the issues with the communist judges? Is that it? What is the timeframe for building sufficient capacity do you think?

This is a brilliant question.

 

[LeahWill]

This is a brilliant question.

Pretty straightforward I would have thought rather than "brilliant", but thank you very much. Just trying to get my head around things

 

[Politruk]

Because we need space to house them while we comply with your embedded communist judges who think illegals have all of the rights you do.

Noncitizens, including "illegals," do have all the same rights citizens have, except for residence and voting. That is the law, and not even a Federalist Society judge will say different.

 

[Politruk]

embedded communist judges

There are none, as you know. Not even a judge appointed on recommendation of the National Lawyers Guild (the sane counterpart to the Federalist Society) would be a Communist.

 

[Politruk]

Damn little compared to a citizen.

That is a lie. See post #68.

 

[Lazaran]

You’re a fake lawyer who makes things up and then throws a temper tantrum when you’re corrected.

And Derpy has been throwing a lot of temper tantrums recently. More than usual, amazingly.

 

[Rightguide]

You didn't answer the question.

They have the right to "due process" which is a hearing before an Article II immigration judge. These judges are not Article III judges (not part of the judiciary), but administrative law judges under the Attorney General, whose findings are not reviewable in any Federal district Court:

8 U.S. Code § 1252 g

"no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter."

 

[Politruk]

Dear sir,
You have insulted me here several times without me ever doing anything to you, except of course disagreeing with you. A lawyer should be used to others not sharing his opinion.

HisArpy is not a lawyer. I can tell, I am one.

 

[ll74]

They have the right to "due process" which is a hearing before an Article II immigration judge. These judges are not Article III judges (not part of the judiciary), but administrative law judges under the Attorney General, whose findings are not reviewable in any Federal district Court:

8 U.S. Code § 1252 g

"no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter."

So if they don't have any process, then their rights have been violated.

Thanks for confirming.

 

[Politruk]

They have the right to "due process" which is a hearing before an Article II immigration judge. These judges are not Article III judges (not part of the judiciary), but administrative law judges under the Attorney General, whose findings are not reviewable in any Federal district Court:

8 U.S. Code § 1252 g

"no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien under this chapter."

The Eighth and Ninth Circuits disagree about whether this provision precludes judicial review over claims brought by noncitizens who are wrongfully removed from the United States.

Section 1252(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides that “no court shall have jurisdiction to hear any cause or claim by or on behalf of any alien arising from the decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders against any alien.” The Eighth and Ninth Circuits disagree about whether this provision precludes judicial review over claims brought by noncitizens who are wrongfully removed from the United States. This Comment advances four arguments for why § 1252(g) should be interpreted narrowly to allow federal jurisdiction over such claims by looking to Supreme Court precedent, legislative history, and public policy: First, Supreme Court precedent suggests that § 1252(g) may apply to only the Attorney General’s discretionary decisions, and wrongful removal is never in the Attorney General’s discretion. Second, precedent and legislative history support a narrow interpretation of the phrase “arising from” in § 1252(g). Third, the plain language of the statute indicates that § 1252(g) may not be implicated when the Attorney General wrongfully removes someone from the United States. Finally, interpreting the statute narrowly is the best normative outcome because it restrains improper executive action and prevents harm to noncitizens.

 

[MajorRewrite]

And Derpy has been throwing a lot of temper tantrums recently. More than usual, amazingly.

I’ve seen ads for Rexulti, a drug to treat agitation caused by Alzheimer’s. Maybe he should give it try.