Unlawfully present means "present in the United States in violation of the immigration laws or the regulations prescribed thereunder." It does not require civil proceedings before you can be subject to felony prosecution.
Truely clueless.....its frightening...
- Thread starter NOVA
- Start date
Unlawfully present means "present in the United States in violation of the immigration laws or the regulations prescribed thereunder." It does not require civil proceedings before you can be subject to felony prosecution.
Incorrect, oh sage one. You ignore what the "immigration laws and regulations prescribed thereunder" actually use to define the legal term of "unlawfully present", which is as I've described and you have agreed. This law does not change that definition, it simply uses an already legally defined term.
What you are doing, and apparently the DNC Chair is utilizing the ignorance of others in how legal terms actually are defined and attempting to apply a different value for "unlawfully present" than the legal definition. The problem is the law directly states which definition it will actually follow in the sentence you are trying to say "changes" it. It doesn't. The law didn't do what the scaremongers tried to get everyone to believe it did, then it also never even became law.
I don't believe that she is ignorant of the legal terminology or the reality, I believe she is deliberately misleading people by not clearing up this particular point of ignorance.
Anyway, you still haven't answered my first question. Which piece of any legislation begins the deliberate government program of "packing them up" or rounding them up, however you want to term it? So far you've utterly failed to produce any legislation that suggests anybody is trying to "pack them all up" yet. I really want to see who produced that legislation.
"Unlawfully present" is not a term in the statute. If you are in violation of any immigration law or (not and) regulation, you are at risk of felony prosecution.
What you are doing is pretending to know what you are talking about when you really haven't a clue.
I know that you are full of shit, but that you don't know enough to realize it.
We are discussing that very piece of legislation.
It is in immigration law. After agreeing what the law states you are now going to say that it isn't defined in statute? Come on... you aren't usually this obvious.
Except we aren't. There is nothing in that legislation that orders the "packing up" of all those who illegally entered the US. It isn't in there.
1. It doesn't suddenly make everybody subject to felony conviction.
2. It doesn't order any government entity to begin the "packing up" of any illegal immigrants, let alone "all" of them.
I understand you are desperate to let people believe that her fear mongering is in some way other than actual fear mongering. But it isn't. She is doing her job, and is willing to tote the line in order to do it. I expect that from the NC Chairs of the parties. So should everybody. What they say absolutely needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
apparently nigel has contracted onceloritis....
Or maybe you're the only one who thinks your questions are really important?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Finally, a politician in this country with common sense. When will the Republicans learn?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
and look who gets offended about questions....the chief question coward who will never answer a question when he knows that by answering the question, he will have to admit, 1) he is wrong; or 2) he lied....
i don't think of my questions on this board as important or not. i don't take this board as serious as you do. i can admit when i'm wrong and be 100% honest. really onceler....that you can't do either on an anonymous board is pretty weird.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
your common sense is beneath my elite sense
I wasn't wrong or dishonest. You don't realize this, since you are a pathological liar. You can neither admit when you're wrong, or be 100% honest, or even 50% honest.
Just clarifying.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
thanks for proving my point onceler.
unlike you, i do admit when i'm wrong. and have done so numerous times on this board. no surprise you would lie and claim i have not and then trot out the old YOU'RE PATHOLOGICAL
you are not mentally sound onceler...seek help
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
you claimed i can never admit i'm wrong. is your claim truthful?
have YOU ever admitted you're wrong on this board?
I have admitted I'm wrong - on some big stuff, as well.
I've seen you admit you're wrong a few times, but it's generally over something trivial, and usually with a fellow hack. Once you dig in on the big stuff, it's over - you can see the truth right in your face, and you'll do nothing but distract & move goalposts.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
4/10 on the weasel scale. it is actually hilarious because your post here PROVES you're a liar:
you claimed i am incapable of admitting when i'm wrong....yet, you now claim you have actually 'seen' me admit i'm wrong. lmao...minutes apart and you can't even keep your story straight.
link to two posts where YOU admit you're wrong. you will be unable to find two posts where you admit you're wrong.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
thank you for admitting your previous statement was not true.
IOW --> a LIE...because you knew before you made that statement that i have in fact admitted when i'm wrong
good for you onceler...you are moving in the right direction. though i am not surprised you can't give a measly TWO posts where you have admitted you are wrong. and your opinion as to "trivial things"....really shows how immature and psychotic you are. when you get busted....must, must, must continue to bash the person you lied about.
"Link up!" Here are 2 I can think of off the top of my head.
SF knows I admitted I was wrong about AGW; I've come clean on that many times. I was also wrong to support Afghanistan as long as I did, and the way they were going about it. I don't feel like scouring the site to meet your demands - I never do, because you never admit you're wrong about the big stuff. It's a useless exercise.
SF knows I admitted I was wrong about AGW; I've come clean on that many times. I was also wrong to support Afghanistan as long as I did, and the way they were going about it. I don't feel like scouring the site to meet your demands - I never do, because you never admit you're wrong about the big stuff. It's a useless exercise.