Does it? You really want to hang your hat on that? How about the legal status question? You got a theory there as well?They landed in the panhandle of Florida and then were flown to Massachusetts. Meets the letter of the law.
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.
Does it? You really want to hang your hat on that? How about the legal status question? You got a theory there as well?They landed in the panhandle of Florida and then were flown to Massachusetts. Meets the letter of the law.
Let me guess, you own an orchard? 🤣Does it? You really want to hang your hat on that? How about the legal status question? You got a theory there as well?
They entered the country illegally then applied for asylum. Yes, you're still illegal at that point. Unless I missed that they all had their asylum trials held already.Does it? You really want to hang your hat on that? How about the legal status question? You got a theory there as well?
David's confused. 😁They entered the country illegally then applied for asylum. Yes, you're still illegal at that point. Unless I missed that they all had their asylum trials held already.
Busses all the way to yank land. 🤣But you libs missed the best part of the whole thing. At the same time the White House was claiming that the "Border was closed", the liberal NE cities were whining about immigrants being shipped there. It completed nuked the narrative that Mayorkis, Biden and the liberal media had attempted to sell.
Yes, I know what DeSantis did as part of the stunt. But still, these migrants were not in Florida, were they? They were in Texas, briefly brought here by the flight, and then flown to Massachusetts. Also, there is the whole "unauthorized alien" part of this too that you are ignoring.They landed in the panhandle of Florida and then were flown to Massachusetts. Meets the letter of the law.
He is hanging his hat on that because that is how DeSantis is trying to defend what he did. DeSantis is also trying to claim those migrants could have come to Florida.You really want to hang your hat on that?
As I stated above, having applied for asylum does not make you an authorized alien. The fact they entered illegally and then applied for asylum clearly qualifies them as unauthorized aliens. As for the "from Florida" portion of the law and as someone who has argued on exactness and semantics in a number of other threads, you should appreciate the fact that the stunt (and it was clearly a political stunt) recognized the "from Florida" requirement and landed the plan in Florida in order to meet the letter of the law. But you can't argue that the individuals were flown from Florida to Massachusetts. That is a simple fact. There was no clause in the law regarding how said illegals entered Florida.Yes, I know what DeSantis did as part of the stunt. But still, these migrants were not in Florida, were they? They were in Texas, briefly brought here by the flight, and then flown to Massachusetts. Also, there is the whole "unauthorized alien" part of this too that you are ignoring.
Perhaps you should take your own advice and read the news on both sides, or the bill itself.
You might hope so, reality is we have been supporting a charity for some 10 years that assist these folks. Another swing and a miss Harry.
I'm not sure this is correct.As I stated above, having applied for asylum does not make you an authorized alien. The fact they entered illegally and then applied for asylum clearly qualifies them as unauthorized aliens.
I disagree that landing a plane filled with migrants from Texas on Florida soil en route to another state does meet the letter of the law. This is definitely an argument lawyers will debate in court with applicable case law.As for the "from Florida" portion of the law and as someone who has argued on exactness and semantics in a number of other threads, you should appreciate the fact that the stunt (and it was clearly a political stunt) recognized the "from Florida" requirement and landed the plan in Florida in order to meet the letter of the law. But you can't argue that the individuals were flown from Florida to Massachusetts. That is a simple fact. There was no clause in the law regarding how said illegals entered Florida.
lol, your delusional. My first reaction was to have a good laugh at your epic fail. One you have yet to recover from!swing and a miss? @my_2cents went bananas when he found out this happened.
lol, your delusional. My first reaction was to have a good laugh at your epic fail. One you have yet to recover from!
They were undocumented. They entered the country illegally. They are all asylum seekers. You and Clinton are little more than bullshit artist playing on words. Who tagged them to be any different than an illegal immigrant. They were not got aways but they are not legal migrants.No, he still hasn't figured this out.
Doubling down with your fail huh?🤣🤣do you mind telling us what makes shipping illegals north to sanctuary cities a good thing when the democrats do it and a bad thing when republicans do it? We all look forward to your brilliant answer.
Words matter and no one is playing on words. If they are processed asylum seekers, that clearly matters and is very relevant to this discussion.You and Clinton are little more than bullshit artist playing on words.
more or lessso @ClintonDavidScott and @my_2cents 2 weeks they get Desantis?
incorrect. go read the law.They entered the country illegally then applied for asylum. Yes, you're still illegal at that point. Unless I missed that they all had their asylum trials held already.
more or less
Doubling down with your fail huh?🤣🤣
Bless your heart.
Why do you oppose timely disposition of their claims? You seem to prefer the chaos - why is that?Most illegal immigrants do not qualify for US asylum
Migrants are commonly called “asylum-seekers,” but statistics show fewer than 5% are.nypost.com
Those entering the country illegally do not qualify for asylum and most everyone knows it. What Democrats are doing is allowing millions into the country knowing it will take years for them to get through the process. During that time many will have children that will give them anchor baby status and of course Democrats will cry about how it's unfair to deport them after being her for years. It's the same BS Democrat have been pulling for years.
Right. That's clearly what he's after: as much chaos as possible. Damn, David, you're smart to spot that so quickly! It went right over the heads of the rest of us.Why do you oppose timely disposition of their claims? You seem to prefer the chaos - why is that?
because it is a ladder?Why do you oppose timely disposition of their claims? You seem to prefer the chaos - why is that?
🤣🤣i know you know that I know I’ve got you pinned against the wall here
Begs the question why folks are firmly dug in on retaining the status quo.The most telling thing for liberals:
There was more attention generated on the immigration crisis (media coverage, commentary in news talk, etc...) for sending 50 immigrants to Martha's Vineyard than there was when 50 migrants died in the back of a semi-truck in San Antonio.
Tell us the answer. Why are you so dug in on retaining Biden’s status quo?.Begs the question why folks are firmly dug in on retaining the status quo.
Who on the right is dug in on the status quo? Its the left that's pushed for sanctuary cities and quit sharing data with ICE. Its the left that fought tooth and nail to stop the wall. Its the left that turned Obama's family detention centers into Trump's "Cages for children". Its the left that reverted the "remain in Mexico" requirement. Its the left that attacked Border Agents for "whipping migrants" simply because a photo showed them using long-reins on their horses. So I ask you, why is the LEFT so firmly dug in on retaining the status quo.Begs the question why folks are firmly dug in on retaining the status quo.