mspart

The original post breakdown: Because she disagreed, basically. Thesis is that she was arrested because she disagreed with federal law. She very well could have disagreed with established federal immigration law. Does that give her a right to break that law, circumvent that law? If so, she is above the law, and you continually says that no one is above the law. The blatant attempt to become a dictator is getting increasingly disturbing. How does a person attempt or try to become a dictator? That is a crazy idea. They either do or they don't. You are not a dictator by enforcing established immigration law that has been on the books for like forever? Just because the law was not enforced in the previous admin, does not mean that the current one cannot enforce it. Homan has been saying this will happen if people obstruct justice. Looks like he was right. A true constitutional crisis. Are you kidding me? Enforcement of the law is the basis for a constitutional crisis? It was the non enforcement of the law that was the crisis. Your opinion here , like in other threads, is not based on any fact or law. I do not wish your version of government on anyone. mspart

So you can read the whole Bondi statement : Wild! Attorney General Pam Bondi explains what really happened with Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan that led to her arrest by FBI: "The Judge learns that ICE was outside to get the guy, because he had been deported in 2013, came back into our country, charged with committing these crimes, victim is in court. Judge finds out. She goes out into the hallway. Screams at the immigration officer. She's furious. Visibly shaken. Upset. Sends them off to talk to the chief judge. "She comes back into the courtroom. You're not going to believe this. Takes the defendant and the defense attorney back in her chambers. Takes them out a private exit and tells them to leave. While the state prosecutor and victims of domestic violence are sitting in the courtroom." Based on her reported behavior, it does not sound good for the WI judge. If convicted, she should lose her bar credentials, law license, and judgeship. She might be absent for awhile. mspart

I think he got his knee stretched. He got taken down, and rolled twice when he started grabbing his knee. He got rolled one or two more times and stayed down. Tough way to go out. mspart

mspart

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/us-allies-line-up-trade-deals-90-day-tariff-pause Some 75 countries have now reached out wanting to negotiate with the White House on trade deals, and 15 countries are in active negotiations https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-faces-imposing-timeline-broker-75-trade-deals-less-90-days-rcna200793 Trump faces imposing timeline to broker 75 trade deals in less than 90 days Just why are 75 countries lining up? mspart

RV says he wants to reduce expenditures, yet complains mightily to the DOGE effort to do just that. He wants people who break the law to be held accountable, just not illegal immigrants nor leftist judges. He wants something unless it affects leftist efforts. In other words, he doesn't really want what he says he wants. mspart

Yet they wrote them because they could predict human behavior. mspart

Real Estate fraud? I can't believe she would prosecute Trump for the same thing after doing it herself. What? Did she not think she would be found out? And it is across state lines so that puts it in the federal purview. Poor poor Letitia. Dumb people making dumb decisions. mspart

Federal Law does not distinguish between a judge dong this, or a normal citizen. What RV wants is to have some people above the law. But he was complaining about that not long ago. It's ok today, not tomorrow. Maybe RV is just upset that it happened to a WI judge. Well, the WI judge should not have broken federal law. Immigration law hasn't changed. Enforcement has. mspart

Ok, it may happen in the future. But today he is not disbarred. That is what you are saying and that is what we have been saying. But you continue to say he is disbarred when he is not officially disbarred. He may be disbarred, but he is not now disbarred. Do you not see the difference? mspart

Back to Abrego: https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/custody-disputes-gang-forms-protective-orders-documents-emerge-involving-abrego-garcia Custody filings obtained by FOX45 News show the man who appears to be the father of Vasquez Sura’s two youngest children filed for an emergency custody hearing in August 2018. The man, Edwin Ramos, claimed the children were in serious danger because Vasquez Sura “is dating a gang member.” So Edwin Ramos wanted custody of the kids he had with Abrego's now wife because Abrego was a gang member. Abrego was pulled over in TN while hauling 8 people from Houston in his bosses car. His boss has been convicted of human trafficking. Yes, this is a peaceful guy living in MD. mspart

I think we are getting smoke tubes soon to smoke cheese. That should be fun. mspart

Ideally this is correct. But in reality, if this had happened in the US to some dude, there would be massive outrage. There was no outrage for the Obama strike. Those same that had no outrage for the Obama strike now have outrage about anything Trump does, even when he said his goal is to deport all illegal aliens. He does it, they outrage. But I think few in the US truly care about this guy who was not peaceful and has a rap sheet and good riddance. If they bring him back to face deportation, what will be the result? He will get deported per Turley https://jonathanturley.org/2025/04/24/npr-abrego-garcia-was-living-quietly-in-maryland-before-he-was-deported/ The only reason that Abrego Garcia was not removed is that he said that he was being threatened by a gang that could harm him in El Salvador. That gang, however, reportedly no longer exists. More importantly, President Trump has declared MS-13 a Foreign Terrorist Organization, which bars the use of the justification for his not being removed. In other words, he has little factual or legal foundation under his original claims to remain in the country. I think Turley is correct. mspart

He has not been disbarred. He has been recommended for disbarment. That is like Pres Trump being impeached. He has been recommended for removal but not removed. Recommending disbarment and being disbarred are two separate things. mspart

Not too many in the US was concerned about the offing of this guy. He was plainly on the wrong side. But I was unaware that the Obama admin took this position. mspart

Quote: Article VII The ratification of the conventions of nine states, shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the states so ratifying the same. Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth. In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names, G. Washington-Presidt. and deputy from Virginia New Hampshire: John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman Massachusetts: Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King ... RV, you might want to reconsider your statement quoted above. Here is the original with the item of discussion clearly delineated: Here is the important part even bigger so you can easily see it: So again, your opinion is wrong and is refuted by the facts. The fact is, Article VII does say, "in the year of our Lord". You'll notice the capitalization of the word Lord in the original. Face it. You are wrong. I am not saying this is proof of Christianity, I am saying this is proof you are wrong and that you speak with forked tongue on things you really don't know anything about. You just wish it was the way you want it to be and state it as if it is so. It is now up to you to show that what is presented here is not factual. But you won't be able to because what is presented is factual. mspart

He just had to beat the GOAT. That's tough but he finally made it. mspart

I think it goes without saying that the Founders believed in Christian tenets of decency, self discipline, and right living. They did not like a government established religion. They did not like compulsion in any form. Hence they wrote the founding documents with those things in mind. There were not establishing a theocracy, but in my opinion, they were establishing a framework of governing authority that works best when Christian tenets are apparent in most of society. This can include Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Buddists. All teach goodness, kindness, and good works. Some more than others. Being a moral people is fundamental to the system of government that they established. A moral people can be free because they will not infringe upon the rights of others, and those chosen to govern will not infringe upon those rights either. It is when the morality of the nation erodes that more laws are needed that weren't needed before, to keep people doing right and curtail those that want to do wrong. Where we are now is we don't even curtail those that want to do wrong as seen in the protests that end up destroying property, setting fires, assault law enforcement, stopping traffic, etc etc. A moral people do not do these things because they infringe on the rights of others. I include all protests that fit the above description. mspart

Thank you. This makes sense that he would wait if that is what he is doing. mspart

I did Veterans FS from 2000-2002. It was fun. They look a lot slower, but I found out I was a lot slower as well. It all evens out. They used to have guys in the F division that did not look good at all. Kudos for getting out there but scary due to injury possibilities. Fortunately, they were not that quick or strong so danger was not high. But falling down could be a problem. I am now in the E category. I hurt my shoulder wrestling and my neck in a car accident. I don't do the competition anymore. They all outclass me anyway. But I did continue asst coaching HS until a few years ago. mspart

I don't know what the eligibility requirements are for WTT. He went to the WCs last year and did not place, got beat and then the guy that beat him got beat so Jordan was out. mspart

Just about everyone that said Dake will lose was wrong. Only exception is Burroughs. And then he beat Burroughs finally. I would not count Dake out, not even close. But if they are on opposite sides of the bracket, I think they will be the finalists. Zahid can do it, but Dake doesn't lose. So there is that. mspart

It's a lot of fun to do if you are thinking about it Rodent. I can't say I did good, but it was fun. I was bound and determined I would not lose due to passivity, so I initiated action and my inexperience and lack of ability got me in trouble from there. But I had a blast doing it. mspart

Factual statement hunt Many wingers have these beliefs, and the percentages skyrocket when you just look at the core MAGA wingers themselves. Opinion only. The term "many wingers" makes this clear. Some of these are in the <50% category (e.g. flat earth theory, didn't land on the moon) but several are in the > or close to 50% category (e.g. election conspiracy, which I forgot to mention, denial of man-made climate change, young earth theory, etc). Opinion. The term "Some of these" makes this clear. mspart

I agree, I think we see him in WTT if he is eligible. He did not have a great showing last year and I would think he would want another shot to make it right. mspart