Border chaos

[tigermud]

https://www.the-independent.com/new...-migration-asylum-seekers-house-b2483420.html

As we all learned from Covid what?s starts as a suggestion today becomes a mandate tomorrow.

 

[Spartanmack]

LOL you didn't even try to refute me pointing out how ridiculous your claim of the DOJ being weaponized is. Hmmmmm I wonder why that is? Hilarious how your talking points fall apart at the first sign of push back.

But tell us more how Ivermectin cures Covid, how Trump can declassify documents with his mind powers and how migrants are being let into the country and voting in elections to ensure Democrats win. :nuts:

Hmmmm, not need wonder - I'll tell you why...because you didn't back up your statement, you just said "conspiracy theory" because that's the best you can do. My point hasn't fallen apart and you haven't pushed back.

and for the record, ivermectin works better than the 19 vaccines you took. As for the rest of your unhinged rant, it's nothing but garbage you've made up to pretend you're winning the argument, well done...

 

[Mitchrapp]

Cake is superior.

Salami on a piece of cake that might work.

 

[Michchamp]

Theft. Acknowledged. I don't watch Fox. The issue is that the CVS is closing because theft is apparently free. Actually, it pays, since street vendors are paying teens to steal so the vendors can sell the stolen goods, right outside the store.

I wonder if knowingly purchasing stolen goods is a crime.

I'm going to push back on this one, and say that CVS is LYING (*See links below, for your edification)

This whole "crime is out of control, and that's why we're closing a store" narrative has been going on for a while, it's been exposed, and it's absurd.

This isn't some mom and pop store that can't afford to stand up to the gangsters shaking them down for protection money... CVS is #6 in the Fortune 500. If they wanted to, they could track down everyone who's ever stolen from their stores, and have the US Constitution changed to allow them to chop off their hands.

Personal note: I also worked in the law departments for two very large retailers from 2007-2020, and saw first hand how lousy management was responsible for theft problems, and poor sales, but what do I know... right?

*Links:
Big Retail Chains Are Manufacturing a Shoplifting ?Crisis? (The Appeal, 11-9-21)

The Great Shoplifting Freak-Out (The Atlantic, 12-21-21)

Retailers say thefts are at crisis level. The numbers say otherwise (LA Times, 12-15-21)

CVS' PR efforts noted in all three articles.

NOT TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT BUT... the biggest theft in the nation is WAGE THEFT, and has been for years, but unfortunately, retail and restaurant workers can't afford to mount their own PR campaign. So no one in either political party is talking about that. Or at least one big enough to get equal airtime to the ones corporate America is running...

On the topic of wage theft:
Wage Theft is a Much Bigger Problem Than Other Forms of Theft?But Workers Remain Mostly Unprotected (EPI, 9-18-14)

?I have not seen one cent?: billions stolen in wage theft from US workers (Guardian 6-15-23)

Is Your Employer Stealing From You? Millions of workers lose billions in stolen wages every year?nearly as much as all other property theft. (GQ, 11-8-19)

Another personal note: corporate America would willingly spend more money on legal fees to their law firms to fight violations of wage theft and in government fines and penalties, than they would spend by just paying their employees properly. And these geniuses will again look you in the eye and tell you that you don't understand business like they do...

 

[Spartanmack]

No, I laid out a point to show how ridiculous your talking point is. That's why you are so incapable of defending anything you say, because you can't offer even a single piece of evidence to back it up. You are left pushing the same pathetic garbage that the rest of the cult echos across social media.

Further proving that point, here you are with the ridiculous claim that Ivermectin is some magic cure all, even though every single study conducted across the globe showed it not being effective at treating Covid. But ignore all of that, you saw someone post something on Twitter and that's your truth now.

You are a perfect example of why people shouldn't engage with conspiracy theorists. I could sit here and post a hundred different articles refuting your wild claim and you would ignore them all and just continue spewing your nonsense.

It is actually sad just how far gone your mind is.

No, you made you no point, you just said it's all conspiracy theories and then followed it up with a nonsensical word salad that doesn't make any point at all let alone disprove anything I've said. It's all right here...

LOL you're a walking billboard for all the lies and conspiracies the radical right spends their days and nights spreading on social media.

But I get it, when Hunter gets charged, it's because he's guilty. When the very same DOJ charges Trump, it's only because they were ordered to do so by Biden. Biden is pretty bad at the whole corruption thing if he doesn't even protect his son, don't you think?

As we've already established, you don't base any of your comments in reality and can't back any of them up with facts. You spew the same lies as the rest of the cult and think that if enough people say the same thing over and over, it becomes the truth. Can't blame you I guess, that's how Orange Hitler does it and you're only following your leader.

This is all garbage, no statement of fact, actually ignoring or whitewashing actual facts, no evidence to support your claim, attributing things to me that i've never said or posted.

By the way, regarding the bolded part, did you miss the sweatheart plea deal Biden's DOJ tried to give Hunter? You know, where they wanted to give him immunity from all future prosecution in these matters in exchange for a promise from him to pay taxes and guilty plea on the gun charge? Just because it failed doesn't mean the didn't try to protect him. How do you not see that?

 

[Spartanmack]

I'm going to push back on this one, and say that CVS is LYING (*See links below, for your edification)

This whole "crime is out of control, and that's why we're closing a store" narrative has been going on for a while, it's been exposed, and it's absurd.

This isn't some mom and pop store that can't afford to stand up to the gangsters shaking them down for protection money... CVS is #6 in the Fortune 500. If they wanted to, they could track down everyone who's ever stolen from their stores, and have the US Constitution changed to allow them to chop off their hands.

Personal note: I also worked in the law departments for two very large retailers from 2007-2020, and saw first hand how lousy management was responsible for theft problems, and poor sales, but what do I know... right?

*Links:
Big Retail Chains Are Manufacturing a Shoplifting ?Crisis? (The Appeal, 11-9-21)

The Great Shoplifting Freak-Out (The Atlantic, 12-21-21)

Retailers say thefts are at crisis level. The numbers say otherwise (LA Times, 12-15-21)

CVS' PR efforts noted in all three articles.

If you're trying to tell us it's management's fault that people steal from them, I would say 'Nothing. You know absolutely nothing.' That's quite possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said here. You're nothing but an apologist for criminals because 'durrr corporations are bad, durrr'

Locking down inventory, increasing security might work but it isn't always practical and even if you're dumb enough to make theft easier, like leave your key fob in your unlocked car, it's still the fault of the criminal if your car is stolen. That's obvious to even an elementary school kid - and those idiots aren't even smart enough to decide their own gender. To say that being stupid is on the same moral plane as being a criminal is insane.

As for these articles and the stats, they're laughably stupid - take the LA Times piece for example. The say retail theft is .07% of sales nationwide. You do realize CVS isn't closing all retail stores nationwide because of retail theft and that not every store has the same theft rate, right? The CVS stores in LA, San Fran, Seattle, Chicago, etc aren't like all the stores nationwide. The retail theft as a percentage of sales at those stores is what matters. That's so obvious my 9 year old kid could see that.

CVS is under no obligation to keep unprofitable stores open regardless of what the national rate of retail theft is. I bet CVS share of retail theft is probably higher than the national average but even if it's low, they're under no obligation to run individual stores at a loss and a risk to their employees and law abiding customers.

Is anyone really dumb enough to think CVS wouldn't keep these stores open if they were profitable and that they're closing them because they don't like what the customers look like? Honestly, that is beyond stupid.

You did make a good point about CVS' power to change the constitution - I wonder why they haven't done that yet? I guess it's just easier to close stores where black people shop...

 

[Spartanmack]

And now you're just trying to rewrite history. The deal fell apart because the DOJ said it did not guarantee immunity and Hunter's attorney said that it did. Holy crap, you literally lie about everything.

Judge Maryellen Noreika, a Trump appointee, repeatedly informed the two sides that she would be no ?rubber stamp.? She picked apart the deal, exposing substantial disagreements over the extent of the immunity provision.

Mr. Clark said the deal indemnified his client not merely for the tax and gun offenses uncovered during the inquiry, but for other possible offenses stemming from his lucrative consulting deals. Mr. Wise said it was far narrower ? and suggested the government was still considering charges against Mr. Biden under laws regulating foreign lobbying.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/19/us/politics/inside-hunter-biden-plea-deal.html

I don't think you or the NYT remember how this actually went down, or maybe they're re-writing history and you're falling for it because orange man bad.

Here's a piece from uber leftist Vox says otherwise... The government tried to pull a fast one on Noreika by taking the immunity provision out of the plea agreement, which she would have had to approve and putting them in the "diversion agreement" which does not require the judge's approval. From the diversion agreement:

?The United States agrees not to criminally prosecute Biden, outside of the terms of this Agreement, for any federal crimes encompassed by the attached State of Facts (Attachment A) and the Statement of Facts attached as Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of Plea Agreement filed this same day.?

Exhibit 1 of the diversion agreement was a detailed recounting of his business affairs, drug use and tax nonpayment from 2016 to 2019.

That is why the judge raised questions - because this kind of shenanigans around immunity deals never happens, they're ALWAYS part of the plea deal and subject to the judge's approval. That's why the deal fell apart.

Good try but you're wrong again - shocking too given the NYT's stellar reputation as the paper of record. I look forward to your correction and apology for calling me a liar in your next post, liar.

 

[Spartanmack]

And now you're cherrypicking from an article and creating a new narrative while ignoring the rest of the article that says exactly what the New York Times article said.

Yet Noreika pressed the government on exactly what that meant. For instance, it had been reported that Hunter had been investigated for potentially violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Under this deal, she asked, could Hunter still be charged under FARA?

Prosecutor Leo Wise said yes. Hunter?s lawyer at the time, Chris Clark, then said he did not agree, and that the deal was off.

Like I've already said, you ignore 99% of the evidence and then pick out that one little tidbit, put your own spin on it and then present it as being the only thing that matters. It's even worse when you do it in the same goddamn article. James Comer would be proud of you.

LOL, the diversion agreement clearly says Biden will get immunity from all future prosecution relating to any of the relevant activities but the guy that helped draft it (and intentionally tried to hide it from the judge by taking it out of the plea agreement) said he "could", wink, wink still be prosecuted and you fell for that?

So in the future when that prosecutor pursues additional charges against Hunter (LOL) and Hunter's lawyer shows a judge the diversion agreement that the prosecutor agreed to, what do you think would happen? Seriously?

And you don't question why that same prosecutor would leave that immunity deal out of the plea agreement and outside the purvue of the judge? Something that is never done? That doesn't make you ask questions? Of course not, because orange man bad.

The deal fell apart because the judge caught the prosecution making a shady deal and like any sane person saw right through what was going on. As the piece says, the judge rejected the deal, the two parties weren't at an impasse.

But Noreika said she still wasn?t prepared to accept the plea due to its unusual structure. And in the weeks since then, talks between Hunter?s attorneys and the government reportedly foundered due to the same issue: the scope of his immunity.

As you may recall, the prosecutor caught so much flack and bad publicity for the garbage deal he tried to give Hunter that there's no way he could get away with pushing it in subsequent negotiations. Quick trying rewrite history, Biden's corrupt DOJ got caught with their pants down and clowns in the media are helping them save face and you're buying it hook, line and sinker.

 

[Spartanmack]

 

[Spartanmack]

Statement from President Joe Biden On the Bipartisan Senate Border Security Negotiations​

For too long, we all know the border?s been broken.

It?s long past time to fix it.

That?s why two months ago, I instructed my team to begin negotiations with a bipartisan group of Senators to seriously, and finally, address the border crisis. For weeks now that?s what they?ve done. Working around the clock, through the holidays, and over weekends.

Let?s be clear.

What?s been negotiated would ? if passed into law ? be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we?ve ever had in our country.

It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.

Further, Congress needs to finally provide the funding I requested in October to secure the border. This includes an additional 1,300 border patrol agents, 375 immigration judges, 1,600 asylum officers, and over 100 cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect and stop fentanyl at our southwest border.

Securing the border through these negotiations is a win for America.

For everyone who is demanding tougher border control, this is the way to do it.

If you?re serious about the border crisis, pass a bipartisan bill and I will sign it.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...partisan-senate-border-security-negotiations/

Don?t you feel a little bit silly that a couple days ago you were arguing fascist right wingers were grossly exaggerating the border problem and now you have a new set of talking points where you pretend Joe knew it was bad all along and has been powerless to fix it because of the Republicans in Congress? Of course not, why be concerned with the truth, you?ve been given a new narrative to push.

Joe has been President for three years and two months ago he realized the border was a shit show? Only a fool would fall for this. We don?t need more laws for him and the DOJ to ignore, we need to enforce the laws we have.

And what?s in the bill? More agents? The ones we have say they aren?t securing the border, they?re social workers giving assistance to migrants coming into the country illegally.

Seems more like an election year attempt to buy votes and in the process consolidate more power in the Presidency further handcuffing states like Texas and Arizona.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Yet again proving you get all your info from Fox News and Twitter.

Here, make today the day you actually learn something.........

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...ion-announces-new-border-enforcement-actions/

POTUS has been getting a lot of pushback from friendly voices, none more prominent than New York Mayor Eric Adams, whom we have established a) is not a Republican, and b) is unlikely persuaded by anything having to do with Fox News.

 

[Spartanmack]

Yet again proving you get all your info from Fox News and Twitter.

Here, make today the day you actually learn something.........

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...ion-announces-new-border-enforcement-actions/

I?ve never been a Fox News consumer and I deactivated my Twitter account years ago, 2016 I think.

Thanks for the Biden White House press release though. Is that where all you middle of the road common sense centrists get your news? If we can?t trust Joe Biden who just found out the border is a shit show 2 months ago, then who can we trust?

 

[tinselwolverine]

So because Eric Adams has an opinion, that suddenly means Biden isn't making any effort to fix the problems? I'm not really following the logic here .

There is no reason a logical person would respond the way you’re responding. a) Eric Adams has been critical of Biden b) Eric Adams most assuredly doesn’t get his info from Fox News c) Eric Adams is not a Republican. That’s what I said, and that’s all I said.

Also, if you think Eric Adams opinions “suddenly” means anything, you are woefully ill informed.

You sure seem to like to read into other people’s posts and infer/imply/make assumptions that they mean things other than what they say.

You’re a waste of time.

 

[byco42]

There is no reason a logical person would respond the way you’re responding. a) Eric Adams has been critical of Biden b) Eric Adams most assuredly doesn’t get his info from Fox News c) Eric Adams is not a Republican. That’s what I said, and that’s all I said.

Also, if you think Eric Adams opinions “suddenly” means anything, you are woefully ill informed.

You sure seem to like to read into other people’s posts and infer/imply/make assumptions that they mean things other than what they say.

You’re a waste of time.

Even this admonition is casting pearls after swine. I'm all for having spirited discussions over different opinions. Not interested in being labeled or blanketed with inaccurate assumptions in response to what I offer.

JBH is a troll with a dopamine addiction.

 

[tigermud]

In order to follow logic you have to have logic

So goes CA so goes the nation. Gavin could be our next president yet. Oakland 300 officers short and still doesn’t have a police chief.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/i...art-degradation-bay-area-local-candidates-say

Demoncrat polices lead to equally assured misery for all. Country is plowing full steam ahead into oblivion

 

[Mitchrapp]

 

[tinselwolverine]

You're someone who thinks you get to trot out a single person who backs your beliefs and that suddenly means you win the debate. But hey, keep on ignoring the fact that it is Democrats who are actively working to address the issues at the border while Trump and his minions try to torpedo it because the morons on the right love having the border to complain about.

You're a waste of time.

What I think is exactly what I said that you quoted - you imply people are saying things that they’re not.

You’re a waste of time.

 

[Spartanmack]

You're someone who thinks you get to trot out a single person who backs your beliefs and that suddenly means you win the debate. But hey, keep on ignoring the fact that it is Democrats who are actively working to address the issues at the border while Trump and his minions try to torpedo it because the morons on the right love having the border to complain about.

You're a waste of time.

If you follow this situation and think Democrats are actively trying to fix a problem they intentionally created, you're a waste of time.

The "bi-partisan" bill is unnecessary and is nothing more than an attempt to virtue signal and blame Republicans for his administrations failure.

The claim that Biden needs the bill to take action is an obvious lie. Biden has all the authority he needs - he already used that authority in the first week of his administration to unwind Trump's executive orders regarding the border. He can simply use that same authority to secure the border - who is going to stop him? His own administration? Although, it would be pretty funny to see Mayorkas sue the Biden administration.

But he won't because 1) he has no intention of securing it and 2) it's an election year, so he's pretending to try to do something he knows will fail and has no intention to implement anyway to shift blame and buy votes. Tthe orange man bad rubes will buy it hook, line and sinker. It's a win-win.

 

[Spartanmack]

needs bacon...

 

[Mitchrapp]

needs bacon...

Not a big fan of bacon.